
Has.; E.'5 g>4 



OPO 




^y ADDRESS 



TO y. 



i^ij C/t ^'' 



FEDERAL CLERGYMEN, 



ON THE 



SUBJECT OF THE WAR 



PROCLAIMED BY THE 

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, 

JUNE 18, 1813, 

T 

* AGAINST THB 

ll5riTED KINGDOM OP GREAT-BRITAIN AND IRELANIX 



BY SOLOMON AIKEN, A. M. 

Pastor of the first Church in DraciUt. 



BOSTON: 

PRINTED FOR THE AUTHOR. 

1813. 



V 




T)lSTT?Tf:T OP MASSACHUSETTS, TO WIT : 

District Clerk's OJice. 

BE IT REMEMBERED, That on the ninth day of JV^arch, A. D. 1813, 
»nd in the thirty-seventh year of the Independence of the United States of 
America, SOLOMON AIKEN, of the said District, has deposited in this 
Office the title of a book, the right whereof he claims as Author, in the words 
following, to -wit : 

An Address to Federal Clergymen, on the subject of the War proclairaed'%f 
the Congress of the United States, June 18, 1812, against the United Kingdom 
of Great Britain and Ireland. By Solomon A;|ken, A.M. Pas^^or of the first 
Church in Draciitt. ..^ 

In conformity to the Act of the Congress of the Baited States, entitled, "An Act 
for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of Maps, Charts and 
Books, to the Authors and Proprietors of such copies, during the times therein 
mentioned ;" and also to an Act entitled, "An Act supplementary to an Act, 
entitled, an Act for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of 
Maps, Charts and Books, to the Authors and Proprietors ef such copies during 
the times therein mentioned ; and extending the benefits thereof to the arts of 
designingi engraving, and etching historical and other Prints." 

V -ixTij T T A T»/r o c CI A -inr 7 Ckrk of the lyistrict . 

WILLIAM S. SHAW, j oyjVA«sflc/n«e«5. 






ADDRESS 
TO FEDERAL CLERGYMEN. 



Heverind and respected Gentlemen, 

IT is our lot to live in a period of time, in which are 
experienced many convulsions and political revolutions 
in the states and powers of the earth ; but in none of 
them are we more interested than in the separation of the 
United States from all political connexion with Great 
Britain* This was an event which excited the attention 
of an admiring world. The circumstances under which 
it took place, were such as directed the astonished eye to 
the hand of him, who is the great Arbiter of the nations 
of the earth, for its accomplishment. The commence- 
ment of our revolutionary war found the patriots of this 
country without military discipline, without arms, 
without ammunition. They being stimulated with 
a love and sense of liberty, made their appeal to 
the supreme Ruler of the universe, for the rectitude 
of their cause ; and contended with England at a 
time when the powers of Europe trembled at her frowns. 
The event was glorious ; it terminated in our freedom, 
sovereignty and independence. Those same revolution- 
ary patriots, who achieved our freedom, lived to form and 
put into operation constitutions of government, as free 
perhaps as the present state of man will admit — repub- 
lican forms of government, rendering the administrators 
thereof, at short periods, dependent on the people for the 
tenure of their offices ; by which we have a government 
of laws and not of men. This is the definition of a 
republic, which the late President Adams gave to his 
fi'iend, the Hon. George Wythe of Virginia, in a letter 
addressed to him in lV76. Speaking of Britain he ob- 



serves, "The wretched condition of this country, how- 
ever, for ten or fifteen years past, has frequently remind- 
ed me of their principles and reasonings. They will 
convince every candid mind, that there is no good gov- 
ernment but what is republican ; that the only valuable 
part of the British constitution is so ; because the verv 
definition of a republic,* is an empire of laws arid not of 
menJ" In setting up such a government in view of all 
the kingly and oppressive governments of the world, 
great apprehensions were entertained by our patriots for 
its success, justly conceiving, that we should meet with 
all that opposition which the envy or jealousy of mon- 
archical powers would cast in our way of enjoying and 
reaping the undisturbed benefits of our liberal and free 
forms of government. But more especially were they 
apprehensive of meeting opposition from that power from 
which they had revolted. In their view it was unrea- 
sonable to suppose, that she would let us rest for any 
length of time, in the unmolested enjoyment of our 
peace and liberty ; and that England made peace from 
necessity, that she might gain strength for the renewal of 
the contest. These are the ideas suggested in a sermon 
delivered in Salem by Dr. Whitaker, May, 1783, con- 
templating the question whether the states should admit 
of the return of the tories among us. He observes, 
page 46, second edition, "The restoration of the tories 
among us will expose us to innumerable and constant 
dangers which will naturally result from having in our 
bowels a multitude of subtle enemies, void of all honor 
and virtue, who, as they never will be reconciled to us, 
will plot our ruin, and lie ever on the watch for the most 
favorable advantage to avenge themselves, by betrj^^ing 
us into the hands and under the tyranny of Great Britain, 
in order to recommend themselves to places of honor and 
profit under their now avowed sovereign. Some may 
imagine that they will gratefully acknowledge the favor, 
and become good subjects of these states, if permitted to 
return. But what ground for such a fancy ? Is it com- 

* Fanner, page 91. ! 



5 

mon to find gratitude such a powerful principle in the 
human heart ? It is a true proverb, that he who injures 
cannot forgive. We may as well hope for Satan's cordial 
friendship to mankind, as that of the torie* to these 
States : for 

''Never can true reconcilement grow, 

"Where M'oumls of deadly hate have piercM so deep.*" 

And in page 48, the Doctor observes, 

*'SHOULDthey [thetories] return, they will probably 
soon engross the chief wealth of these States ; and as 
wealth usually begets power, they will," as before assert- 
ed, "easily possess themselves of the chief seats of 
government, pervert our councils, and reduce us, by 
their arts, to that subjection to Great Britain, which the 
power of her arms could not accompUsh.f It is too 
manifest that Great Britain is far from approving our 
indq^endence. Necessity compelled her to a cessation 
of hostilities. The check given her the last year, by 
preventing British goods from coming among us, re- 
duced her to shift the plan of subjugating us ;" for 
this is still her object, "her recources here were by this 
cut off, and she reduced to the greatest distress. Her 
only safety lay in a present cessation of hostilities ; this 
would give her respite to repair her strength, till a more 
favorable opportunity should offer to attain her wished 
for end, the enslaving America." That England would 
force the United States into another war with her, was 
the most sanguine expectation of the late President 
Adams at the time of negotiating the peace on the con- 
clusion of the last war. This he expresses in a letter 
dated July 6, 1812, to his honorable friend and corres- 

*MlLTON. 

t "They must be infatuated who imagine that Britain will, for 
a long time, be reconciled to our separation from her. We ought 
to be very jealsus that every art in her power will be used to re- 
duce us under her dominion ; many arethe plots already laid, and 
artifices used to this end. But the principle, I apprciiend, is to 
procure the return of the tories amau|;u!>. as being the most suitable 
tools bv which to work our rnin." 



e 

poiicleiit Mr. Elkanah Watson. "To your allusion to 
the war, I have nothing to say, but that it is with surprise 
that I hear it pronounced, not only by newspapers, but 
by persons in authority, ecclesiastical and civil, and 
political and military, that it is an unjust and unneces- 
sary war : that the declaration of it was altogether unex- 
pected, &c. How it is possible that a social and moral 
creature can say that the war is unjust^ is to me utterly 
incomprehensible. How it can be said to be unneces- 
sary, is very mysterious — I have thought it both just and 
necessary lor five or six years. How it can be said to be 
unexpected, is another wonder — I have expected it more 
than five and twenty years, and have great reason to be 
thankful that it has been postponed so long, I saw such 
a spirit in the British islands, when I resided in France, 
in Holland, and in England itself, that I expected another 
war much sooner than it has happened ; I was so im- 
pressed with the idea, that I expressed to lord Lansdownc, 
formerly lord Shelburn, an apprehension that his lordship 
would live long enough to be obliged to make, and that 
I should live long enough to see another peace made 
between Great Britain and the United States of America. 
His lordship did not live to make the peace, and I shall 
not probably live to see it, but I have lived to see the war 
that must be followed by a peace, if the war be not 
eternal." According to these apprehensions and pre- 
dictions of those sages, we have never ceased to 
experience the hostilities of England towards us. She 
laid foundations for our perplexity and her annoyance of 
us, and they were in operation immediately on the close 
of the war for our independence ; the greatest and 
most effectual of which was her making provision for the 
tories to return and dwell amongst us, which was the 
sentiment and fears of Dr. Whitaker. Contrary to his 
wish, it took place ; and Britain has never suffered us 
to be without our just complaints of her ; immicdiately 
upon the close of the war, she availed herself of taking 
our men from our vessels, under pretext of their being 
deserters from her service, the similarity of the two 
nations so exactly agreeing. On this ground, promp- 



ted by the superiority of her naval force, she took the 
utmost liberty, which has been a most serious matter of 
complaint on our part from that early day to this. This 
has been acknowledged by all parties among us, as well 
by the friends of Britain, as those of the independence of 
the United States. England availed herself of a pretext 
to delay and not fulfil the articles of peace with us ; but 
retained the posts on our frontiers, and facilitated the 
depredations of the hostile savages on our defenceless 
citizens, women and children. England has ever sought 
pretexts to depredate upon our commerce, and cramp 
our rising prosperity. This in one instance was effected 
in her making war with France, and intermeddling with 
her internal concerns, in the first stages of the French 
revolution. This, as England wished to have it, flung 
the trade of neutrals into a degree of confusion and 
uncertainty, a state always desired and sought for by 
England, as favorable to her spirit of depredation and 
robbery. 

That England has never ceased to manifest this 
itnfriendly, hostile disposition towards us, is in the mem- 
ory of our citizens, found in the journals of Congress, 
and acknowledged by all parties. Among a cloud of 
W'itnesses I shall quote only the testimony of the Rev. 
Dr. Osgood, as being full to the purpose. In his 
thanksgiving discourse on the 19th of November, 1795, 
page 23, we read, "At the close of the war which se- 
cured our independence, though hostilities ceased, yet 
the rancorous passions, which had been so long in full 
swell, could not immediately subside. A sense of re- 
cent injuries on the one part, and accustomed haughti- 
ness and insult on the other, were a constant stimulus 
to actions bordering on an infringement of the pacification. 
Chagrined with disappointment in the object of the war, 
and mortified with the advantages which they had been 
forced to concede at the peace, the British government 
were on the watch for a plausible pretext to evade of 
delay the complete execution of the treaty.'* They 
availed themselves of what they considered as an infrac- 
tion of the treaty on our part, to excuse a yet greater 



on their's, in keeping possession of tlie western posts, 
and thereby facilitating the inroads of hostile savages 
upon our defenceless frontiers. Thus a controversy, 
threatening to open fresh wounds yet not closed, was 
begun, and with mutual recriminations, but with no hope 
of end or settlement, carried on to the commencement 
of the present war. When the British again armed at 
all points, our commerce floating unprotected on the 
wide ocean, in the midst of their fleets, cruisers and 
privateers, was, to an old enemy, an object too tempt- 
ing to be suffered to pass unmolested. They knew 
their own strcjigth and our weakness, had little fear of 
retaliation, and of course were not scupulous in what 
manner they treated us. Their spoliations were sudden, 
insidious and intolerable.'* 

This is the testimony of Dr. Osgood, concerning the 
British treatment of us, previously to the treaty of 1794, 
commonly known by Jay's treaty. But what relief have 
we experienced since ? If it were as the Dr. says, that 
"her spoliations were" then * 'sudden, insidious and intol- 
erable," how much more so have they been since ? It 
has been a constant theme of complaint from that time 
to this. The measures, which England has taken to 
annoy us, to cramp our rising prosperity, and ta regain 
what she lost in our revolt from her, with those leading 
to the ultimatum, our final subjugation to her, I shall 
consider. 

The impressment of our seamen, takes the lead in 
her cruel and arbitrary group of injuries. This auda- 
cious, inhuman and afflictive practice, she early assumed ; 
even from the time of acknowledging us independent ; 
and with such unblushing rapacity has she done it, that 
it has ever been considered a just ground for a declara- 
tion of war against her. This is manifest by a 
recurrence to public documents, in our diplomatic cor- 
respondence with that nation, which will be seen in its 
place. To this declaration I may do well to add the senti- 
ments of the late venerable President Adams, in his pri- 
vate, as well as public character. In his able and lucid 
dissertation on the subject of the impressment cf our 



seamen, he says, "our citizens have as good a li.^ht to 
protection as British subjects, and our government is as 
much bound to afford it. What is the impressment of 
seamen ? It is no other than what the civilians call 
piagiat, a crime punishable with death by all civilized 
nations as one of the most audacious and punishable 
offences against society. It was so considered among 
the Hebrews." "He that stealeth a man and selleth him, 
or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to 
death,*' Exod. xxxi. 17. "If a man be found stealing any 
of his brethren, then that thief shall die,*' Deut. xxiv. 7. 
The laws of Athens, like those of the Hebrews, con- 
demned the plagiary or manstealer to death ; and the 
laws of Rome pronounced the same judgment against the 
same outrage. "It is not for me to say that any thing 
would furnish a sufficient ground for an embargo, for 
any long time. This I leave to the responsibility of the 
President, Senate and Representatives in Congress. But 
I say with confidence, ^^that it fuimishes a siifficiejit 
ground for a declaration qfxvar.'** "Not the murder of 
Pierce, nor all the murders on board of the Chesapeak, 
nor all the other injuries and insults we have received 
from foreign nations, atrocious as they have been, can 
be of such dangerous, lasting, and pernicious conse- 
quences to this country, as this proclamation,* if we 
have servility enough to submit to it.*' 

Great Britain has not only availed herself of our 
seamen, sufficient in number to man six 74 gun ships, 
but she has availed herself of our property also, by seiz- 
ing our vessels upon the seas, without having regard to 
justice, law, or the usages of nations. Blockading tc'r- 
ritories where there was not a sufficient force applied to 
render it dangerous to enter, and without giving previ- 
ous notice thereof, and putting her decrees in force from 
the time of enactment ; for the want of sufficient force 
for the effectual blockade which she pretends, she has 

* Having reference to the proclamation of Iiis Britannie Majes- 
ty, calling home his native subjects, and ordering their imprcss- 
menl-from foreign ^ssels — i«siifd October 16th, JSO". 



10 

ordered her cruisers about, and into the mouth of 
our harbours to seize our out and homebound naviga- 
tion. In this way, from us she may easily blockade the 
whole world. She has treated with contempt our terri- 
torial jurisdiction, and wantonly spilt the blood of our 
fellow citizens. At length she passed her Order in 
Council, requiring of us in our European voyages, to 
touch at one of her ports, unload, load up again, pay- 
transportation duties, buy her licence, and proceed to 
the port it specifies — on the return voyage touch again, 
unload, "except the cargo shall consist wholly of flour, 
meal, grain, or any article or articles the produce of the 
soil of some country which is not subjected to the restric- 
tions of the said order, except cotton, &,c." — see Orders 
in Council, the 25th of Nov. 1807, as communicated to 
Congress, Dec. 12, 1808. Look at the tables of duty, 
contained in the same report of A. B. and C. and you 
will find that England exacts of us more than five per 
centum on all our extra produce for a market to Europe ; 
and these duties to be augmented or diminished accor- 
ding to the wisdom of his Majesty. And if we should 
calculate the same in our return cargoes, as in the transit, 
we shall add five per cent, more, which we justly may save 
in the exception before made. Then in fact England in 
her Orders in Council requires of us ten per cent, tax on 
all our extra produce for a market. She requires this of 
us not from justice, but from the superiority of her 
naval power. Every other nation has as good a right to 
demand it of us, and we must grant it if we yiekl to this, 
where we have in our treaties with them stipulated to 
treat ihem according to the most favored nations, which 
is common in treaties. It would be highly condescend- 
ing in his Britannic Majesty, if he would consent to ap- 
point suitable officers in all our ports of exportation, to 
receive the duties on the outset of the voyage, and not 
require our vessels to take a circuitous rout to call at one 
of their ports ; and besides this, it would save our ves- 
sels all the labor, trouble and expense of unloading, and 
of loading up again. Is not this for re -colonization ? And 
does not the Prince Regent of the United Kingdom 



u 

make large strides to rcg:5in what his father lost by the 
revolt of the U. States '? That the conduct of England 
towards us has been as here represented is manifest by 
public documents. See the President's message to 
Congress of June 18, 1812 :— "British cruisers 
have been in the practice also of violating the 
rights and peace of our coasts. Th.ey hover over 
and harrass our entering and departing commerce. 
The most insulting pretensions they have added to the 
most lawless proceeding in our very harbors ; and have 
wantonly spilt American blood within the sanctuary of 
our territorial jurisdiction." "Under pretended block- 
ades, without the presence of an adequate force, and 
sometimes -without the practicability of applying one, 
our commerce has been plundered in every sea." "In 
aggravation of these predatory measures, they have been 
considered as in force from the date of their notification ; 
a retrospective effect being thus added, as has been done 
in other important cases, to the unlawfulness of the 
coulee pursued," and to render the outrage the more 
signal. These mock blockades have been reiterated and 
enforced in the hce of official communications of the 
British government, declaring, as a true definition of a 
blockade, "that particular ports must be actually inven- 
ted, and previous warning given to vessels bound to them, 
not to enter." "Not content with these occasional expe- 
dients for laying waste our neutral trade, tl-e cabinet of^ 
Great Britain, at length, resorted to the sweeping sys- 
tem of blockade, under the name of Orders in Council, 
which has been moulded and managed, as might best 
suit its political views, its commercial jealousy, or the 
avidity of British cruisers." 

So ft;r has Britain extended the means of her monop- 
oly of trade, as to prohibit the lawful trade of the Uni- 
ted States with her enemy, and deceptively carry it on 
herself, under the f;ag and forged papers of the U. States, 
and some of tliese are reckoned among the vessels of the 
U. States which France has tak^i^id burnt, and ma- 
nacled their crews, which have been so liberally pub- 
lished in the federal papers in the U. States, recur to 



12 

the befor^e mentioned documents. ''It has become indeed 
sufficiently certain, chat the commerce of the U. States 
is to be sacrificed, not as interfering with the beHigerent 
rights of G. Britain, not as supplying the wants of her 
enemy, which she herself supplies ; but as interfering 
with the monopoly she covets for her own commerce 
and navigation. She carries on a war against the lawful 
commerce of a friend, that she may the better carry on a 
commerce with an enemy, a commerce polluted by the 
forgeries and perjuries which are for the most part the 
only passports by which it can succeed."' This of itself 
is a just cause of war, on the part of the U. States against 
England. ---Another and highly sufficient cause of war 
against England is her influencing the saviiges to hos- 
tilities against us. In the message it is thus expressed — 
"In reviewing the conduct of Great Britain towards the 
U- States, our attention is necessarily drawn to the war- 
fare just renewed by the savages on one of our extensive 
frontiers ; a -warfare which is known to pare neither 
age nor sex, and to be distinguished by features pecu- 
Vvarly shocking to humanity. It is difficult to account 
for the activity and combinations which have been for 
some time developing themselves among the tribes, in 
constant intercourse with British traders and garrisons, 
without connecting their hostility with that influence ; 
and without recollecting authentic examples of such in- 
tcrj.iositions heretofore fin-nished by the officers and 
agents of that government." 

His Britannic Majesty's issuing orders to encourage 
our citizens to violate the embargo laws, can be consid- 
ered in no other point of view, thancin hostile act against 
the U. States. These orders were eiven the 11th of 
April 1808, in the following words. "Our will and 
pleasure is, that you do iiot interrupt any neutral \'essel, 
laden with lumber and provisions, and going to any of 
our colonies, islands, or settlements, in the West- Indies, 
or South-America, tQ whomsoever the property may 
appear to belong, ;^>d3ic^'withstanding such vessel may 
not have regular clearances and documents on board ; 
and in case any v easel shall be met with, and being on 



13 

her due course to the alleged portof destniation, an -.•n- 
dorscment shall be made on one or more of the princi- 
pal papers ol" such vessel, specifying tlie destination alleg- 
ed, and the place where the vessel was so visited ; and 
in case any vessel so laden shall airive and deliver her 
cargo at any of our colonies, islands, or settlements 
aforesaid, such vessel shall be permitted to receive her 
freight, and to depart either in ballast, or any goods that 
may be legally exported in such vessel, and to proceed 
to any unblockaded port, notwithstanding the present 
hostilities, or an}^ future hostilities which may take place ; 
and a passport for such vessel may be granted to the ves- 
sel by the governor, or other person having the chief 
civil command of such colony, island, or settlement. 

G. R/' 

It seems by this order, that his Britannic Majesty con, 
templated the present war, or our submission to him, bv 
saying, "notwithstanding the present hostilities, or any 
future hostilities which may take place ;" so that for 
aught of any annoyance from England, whoever may be 
disposed, may now trade with his Majesty's colonies, 
islands, or settlements. If this order had not been issu- 
ed till after the declaration of war against the United 
Kingdom, it would have a different appearance from 
what it curries. 

Dr. Whitakerand President Adams were not deceiv- 
ed \vhen they suggested their sentiment that England 
never lost all hope of subduing us. At the cessation of 
arms, she only changed the mode of warfare, and adop- 
ted one much more efficacious and fatal than o])cn hos- 
tilities, viz. intrigue and division, well knowing the 
eternal truth, that "a kingdom divided against itself can- 
not stand." And never was there so fair an opportu- 
nity for her, nor a people so exposed as we were ; ever}'- 
possible advantage Tor such a warfiire, Eng-land posj:es- 
sed over us. Our former connexions, the similarity of 
our language, complexion, habits, customs and manners, 
are all circumstances facilitating such a purpose. Htr 
emissaries might be conversant with us undistinguished, 
and bv the return of the tories, the seed of division was 



14 

pluated in the most favorable soil for its (lulck and lux- 
uriant growth. The liberty of our press was taken ad- 
vantage of, as the most powerful instrument to create 
discord. The friends of Britain experienced no want 
of money or means to facilitate the purpose ; soon were 
their presses multiplied in every part of the Union, all in 
concert, and having the same general object in view. 
As circumstances would permit and prudence dictate, 
they were more and more open and bold in vilifying our 
prominent revolutionary characters, and in speaking of 
our republican forms of government with contempt to 
bring them into disrepute, comparing them to a "sow 
and farrow of pigs." Early wepe Hancock and Adams, 
the proscribed friends of this country, the objects of their 
resentment and detraction. The British have had op- 
portunity, by all that accumulation of her friends which 
money would purchase, with their thousand presses, to 
write, utter and publish whatever they have pleased 
without restraint, both against our rulers and their 
measures. And in proportion as the British ministry 
could find support here, they would extend their pre- 
tensions towards us. Britain has done every thing she 
could to keep the commerce of the world in a state of 
tumult and perplexity. It has been her policy to trou- 
ble the waters of all the oceans, that she might fish in 
them, being sure of the boot}*, with her thousand hooks. 
For this she has made war with France, and with Spain, 
having a double object in \'iew, not only that she might 
sweep the ocean of its commerce, the trade of the United 
States with that of other nations from the thousand pre- 
texts which would shoot up from the bitter root ; but 
to perplex the administration of our government, and 
thereby give us no rest, that she might weaken ar.d di- 
vide us, and bring us totally subservient to herself. And 
for the better accomplishment of the object, it is mani- 
fest there has always been a perfect systematic under- 
standing of the matter, between England and her friends 
in this country, both in and out of power, as they have 
always acted in concert. But more especially has it 
been the ease wiili her friends in Congress. When 



i5 

Britain would annoy and perplex our coromerce upon 
the ocean under pretexts of blockades, which were as 
easily extended as words express them, then would her 
friends in Congress join issue, to perplex our councils. 
When war, embargo or submission were proposed, as 
the only alternati>'es, they would consent to neither. 
When called on for a substitute, they were silent. 
When England with her double face would negociate, 
with high professions of a warm desire amicably to ad- 
just all existing differences, with an apparent determina- 
tion to do something which was right and equitable, and 
when all the time possible had been consumed, and come 
to the signing of the treaty, on their part was an inadmissi- 
ble article added, to which our ambassadors, Munroe and 
Pinkney objecting, the treaty is forwarded to our chief 
executive. He also rejects it, and lays it not before the 
Senate. Then is there much said, that our government 
are hollow hearted, they reject a treaty which our minis- 
ters Munroe and Pinkney approved, they wish not for a 
settlement, they must please Bonaparte, Sec. without 
bringing into view this inadmissible article. These re- 
presentations, though totally unfounded, and a thousand 
others which are constantly circulated in the numerous 
British papers through the U. States, have and will necessa- 
rily have their effect upon the minds of many, who are not in 
a situation to investigate all subjects, and their minds are 
prejudiced, for it has been the policy of England and her 
friends in this country, in most places to be aforehand 
of any republican presses, and such previous preju- 
dices, thereby formed against the administrators of our 
Government, by their thousand subtile misrepresenta- 
tions, that many will not even read those papers which 
investigate subjects, and are calculated to undeceive 
them. And when their misrepresentations are exposed 
to the public, they seem to have no other effect upon their 
authors tlian to excite them to a reiterated unblushing re- 
publication of them, as if they were fully sensible that 
"a lie well stood to, is as good as the trutli," By such 
nieims is our country flnno: into this most dan G:.erou sand 
unhannv situation in which it novr is ; and because we 



16 

were lioi druirii to war, even from the befrinnino: of 
WashingLOM'sadniinistration, was not because we had not 
just o-roundlbr it. The sources of negotiation had be- 
come totally exhausted, while the unsufferable injuries we 
experienced were constandy augmenting'. It was appar- 
ent that the British ministry were willing to keep up their 
deceptive insincere negotiations with us, for no better 
purpose than to obtain time unmolestedly to depredate 
upon our men and property, and gain friends among our- 
selves. Her war for years past has been more detri- 
mental than open hostilities. If she had continued that 
war from that time to this according to her strength, I 
believe it would have been better for us. But she was 
politic. She changed her mode of warfare, and insidi- 
ously attacked us on the weak side, making use of gold 
and intrigue ; and has now at length, after years of pa- 
tience and expostulations in every administration, brought 
our government to open hostilities, who can have no oth- 
er possible motive therefor than the defence of our na- 
tional rights, sovereignty and independence, and this must 
be well known, for the}^ are dependent entirely on the 
good sense and patriotism of this nation, not only to be 
supported in the contest, but for the tenure of their offi- 
ces. And now, " strange to tell !" after all these injuries 
and insults being experienced with increasing aggravation 
from the British lion, and war proclaimed, he has in the 
view of some, who call themselves Americans, all at once 
put oil his rapacious voracious qualities, and assumed the 
innocence and milchiess of the lamb ! Can the leopard 
so suddenly change his spots, and transfer them to his 
opponent ? For now, Rev. gendemen, you are in your 
publications ascribing righteousness to "the government 
of Britain, and imputing iniquity to your own rulers. 
You say, preach and pulolish, that the war in which M-e 
are engaged, is unjust on our part, that it is wicked and 
murderous — that it proceeds from a rash madness in 
our rulers, to please the French emperor — that England 
has not given us sufficient provocation to excite our hos- 
tilities against her, that she is disposed to do justice in 
matters of difference with us-~-that those who abet and 



17 

lend their assistance to carry on tlie wjr, in personal ser- 
vice, or by the loan of their money, are guilty of blood — • 
ihit you cannol pray for the success of our arms, S^c. 
By your late publications which 1 have been able con- 
veniently to obtain, 1 ftnd that your principal arguments 
against the war, are similar to those made use of by the 
34 addressers of Congress to their constituents, offering 
reasons for their negative, upon the question of war. 
This address seems to have furnished abundance of mat- 
ter for later publications. 

I SHALL now, Rev. gentlemen, endeavour fairly to meet 
the method taken, and the arguments used in opposition 
to the present war. And in this I beseech you, of your 
clemency, to hear me patiently, for I have undertaken an 
arduous task, to follow, arrest and bring before the pub- 
lic, gentlemen long winded and expert in dv vious' ways. 
No sinister orators to gain a wicked end could do better 
than the opposers of the present war. They misrepre- 
sent as to matters of fact. This is evident with respect 
to the thirt3^-four members of Congress who became 
addressers to their constituents. In page 9th, they say, 
"Ever since the United States have been a nation, this 
subject (viz. of impressment,) has been a matter of com- 
plaint and negotiation, and every former administration 
have treated it according to its obvious nature, as a sub- 
ject rather for arrangement, than for war : it existed in the 
time of Washington, yet this father of his country rec- 
ommended no such resort." This is true, gentlemen ; but 
he considered it a just occasion of war notwithstanding, 
for in 1792, he thus writes to Mr. Pinknev who was 
minister in London, June 11th, "In order to urge a 
settlement of this point (impressment) before a new oc- 
casion may arise, ir may not be amiss to draw their atten- 
tion to the peculiar irritation excited on the last occasion, 
and the diiliculty of avoidinfj: our makins: immediate 
reprisals on their seamen here." Thus although Wash- 
ington did not recommend war, he considered it a iust 
occasion of war, as it required reprisals of tlieir seamen 
here—so have the addressers misrepresented ^\''ashing•- 
ton's sentiments. And in another letter to ?vlr. Pinkney 



IS 

dated the 6th of November foUowint^, Washington writes, 
•^'It is impossible to develope to you the inconvenience 
of this practice, and the impossibility of letting it go on.'' 
Little could Washington then think it could go on for 
twenty years longer. Mr. Pinkney our minister at 
London in conversation with Mr. Bond who was appoint- 
ed by lord Grenville to converse with him on the subject, 
in writing to our secretary in 1793, says, "I answered, 
unless we could come to some accommodation which 
might insure our seamen against this oppression, meas- 
ures Avoiild be taken to cause the inconvenience to be 
equally felt on both sides.'* Does this look as if Wash- 
ington considered the practice of impressment, no occasion 
of war ? It is surely an hostile threat. And again, Pi - 
sident Washington in writing by his secretary to Mr. 
King our minister in London, Sept. 10, 1796, tells him, 
"If the British government have any regard to our rights, 
any respect to our nation, and place any value on our 
friendships they will even facilitate to us the means of 
relieving our fellow citizens." Is not this a clear decla- 
ration, that if the practice of impressment be not relin- 
quished, and those impressed be not relieved, tliat 
they will no longer have our friendship ; but that we 
shall assume an hostile attitude towards them ? Com- 
pare the language of the addressers with those declara- 
tions of Washington. They say of him, "Yet tiiis 
father of his country recommended no such resort," 
(viz.) war. This is but a subtle expression, full of de- 
ceit, true in words ; but false in sentiment. The idea 
which their constituents will receive, is, that Wash- 
ington did not conceive the continuance of impressment a 
just ground of war, which is certainly incorrect. The 
addressers again say, "it existed in the time of Adams, 
yet notwithstanding the zeal in support of our maritime 
rights, which distinguished his administration, xvar was 
never suggested by h'nn as the remedy ;" this is incorrect. 
Judge Marbhall when acting as secretary of state under 
r.Ir. Adams, v.rote thus to Mr. King, our minister in 
London, on the 20th September, 1800, "Should we 
impress from the m.erchant service of Great Britain not 



19 

only Americans, but foreigners, and even British sub^ 
jccts, liovv long would such a cause of injury, unredress- 
ed, be permitted to pass unrevenged ? How long would 
the government be content with unsuccessful remon- 
strances and unavailing memorials ? I believe, sir, that 
only the most prompt correction of, and compensation 
for, the abuse, would be permitted as satisftiction in such 
a case." The judge then urges a relinquishment of the 
practice, lest they '^'force our government into measures 
which may very probably terminate in an open rupture." 
Is it not apparent here, that zvar was really suggested as 
a remedy, under Adams' administration, notwithstand- 
ing the declaration of the addressers to the contrary ? 

The addressers again say, "During the eight years 
Mr. Jefferson stood at the helm of affiirs, it still continu- 
ed a subject of controversy and negotiation, but it was 
never made a cause for war." Here is another of their 
deceptive sentences, true in words, but so managed as 
to convey false doctrine. "It was never made a cause 
for war" — True, because our government did not go to 
war, and not because they did not consider it a just 
ground for it. This is manifest by a recurrence to pub- 
lic documents. Mr. Jefferson, by his secretary, wrote to 
Mr. Pinkney our minister in London, on 20th May, 1807, 
that, "Without a provision against impressments, no 
treaty is to be concluded/' Here the practice of impress- 
ment is considered an effectual bar to peace. It is made 
the sine qua non of a treaty ; none was to be formed 
while the practice remained. 

The addressers again observe, "It was reserved for 
the present administration to press this topic to the ex- 
treme and most dreadful resort of nations." And good 
reason why, because this grievous complaint has been a 
j ust occasion of vv^ar in the uniform sentiment of every 
administration of our government ; and the only effect 
of twenty years of negotiation and arrangements has been 
to increase the evil. 

In page 8, the addressers observe thus, "The claim of 
Great Britain pretends to no greater extent, than to take 
British seamen from private merchant vessels ; in the 



20 

exercise of this claim, her officers take Ammcan seamen, 
and foreign seamen in American service, and although 
she disclaims such abuse, a?id proffers redress xvhe7i 
knoxvn^ yet undoubtedly grievous injuries have resulted 
to the seamen of the United States." 

This proffering redress when known, is calculated to 
deceive the people, and is often made use of by the 
friends of England. "* 

Dr. Osgood in his solemn protest, &c. pages 10, 11, 
"With respect to the two first of these provocations, the 
impressment occasionally of some of our sailors, and an 
instance or two ofoutraa:e in our harbours, it has never 
been pretended that cither of these was authorised by the 
British government." Before I proceed further, 1 will 
propose an amendment of this last sentence without alter- 
ing a letter or word, and read it thuii : *it has never been 
pretended hy the British go\crnmtrit, that either of these 
was authorized.' The Dr. proceeds — "In every instance 

- they were the irregular, unw^aTanted acts of individuals, 
subordinate officers, whose rashness and folly no govern- 
ment can at ail times and every where restrain ; the 
redress of these grievances however, and compensation 
for such injuries, after proof of them has been fairly and 
fully exhibited^ have never been refused." 

To shew the incorrectness of the Dr's. assertion and all 
similar or.es, it is sufficient, only to exhibit a catalogue of 
reasons why our impressed seamen could not be deliver- 
ed up when demanded. In this I shall be govern- 
ed l-.y that in-serted in a letter addressed by Mr. 
John Quincy Adams, to Mr. Harrison Gray Otis. 
page 18; when the men are demanded he observes — 

^ "The lords of the admirady, after a reasonable time for 
inquiry and advisement, return for answer, that the ship 
is on a foreign station, and their lordships can take no 
further steps in the matter, or that the ship has been taken, 
and the men have been received in exchange for French 
prisoners, or that the men had no protections," theimpresj^- 
jng officers often having taken them from the men,* "or 

* I Isaac Clark, of .Salem, in the County of Essex, and Com- 
monwealth of Miissacluisetfs. on solemn otith declare, that I was; 
born in the tov.n of RandoipU in the County of Norfolk, have 



( 2i 

that the men are probably British subjects, or that they 
have entered and taken the bounty ;" to which the officers 
know how to reduce them, "or that they have been 

sailed out of Salem aroresaiil, about seven years ; that on tlie 
fourteenth day of June, eighteen hundred and nine, 1 was impress- 
ed, and forcibly taken from the ship Jane, of Norfolk, by the 
sailing master, (his name was Carr) of his majesty's ship Porcu- 
pine, Robert Elliot, commander. I Iiad a protection from the 
custom house in Salem, which I shewed to Capt. Elliot ; he swore 
I was an Englishman, tore my protection to pieces before my eyes, 
and threw it overboard, and ordered me to go to work; I told him 
I did not belong to his flag, and 1 would not do work under it. He 
then ordered my legs put in irons, and the next morning ordered 
the master at arms to take me on deck and give me two dozen of 
lashes ; after receiving tliem, he ordered him to keep me in irons, 
and give me one biscuit and a pint of water for twenty-four hours. 
After keeping me in this situation one week, I was brought on 
deck, and asked by Capt. Elliot if I m ould go to my duty ; on my 
refusing he ordered me (o strip, tied me up a second time, and 
gave me two dozen more, and kept me on the same allowance anoth- 
er week— then ordered me on deck again and asked if I would go 
to work ; I stili persisted that I was an American, and that he had 
no right to command my services, and I would do no work on board 
his ship. He told me he would punish me until I was willing to 
work ; and then gave the third two dozen lashes, ordered a vei-y 
lieavy chain put round my neck, (such as they had used to sling 
t'le lower yard,) fastened to a ringbolt in the deck, and that no 
person, except the master at arms, should speak to me, or give me 
any thing to eat or to drink, but one biscuit and pint of water 
for tweuty-four hours, until I would go to work. I was kept iu 
■ this situation NINE WEEKS, when being exhausted by hunger 
and thirst, I was obliged to yield. After being on board the ship 
more than two years and an half, and being wounded in an action 
with a French frigate, I was sent to the hospital ; when partially 
recovered, I was sent on board the Impregnable, a 98 gun ship. 
My wound growing worse I was returned to the hospital, when 
the Amcrici'.n Consul received a copy of my protection from 
Salem, and procured my discharge, on the twenty-ninth day of 
April last. 

There were seven impressed Americans on hoard the Porcu- 
pine, three of whom had entered. 

ISAAC CEARK. 

Essex, ss. December 28th, 1812. 
Then Isaac Clark personally appeared, and made solemn oath 
that the foregoing declarations, by him made and subscribed, were 
tVue in all their parts. Before, 

John Punchakd,^ Justices of the Peace 
Mi. '^«\y^-^;•,^•n. V and of the Quorum. 



liuirnccl, or settled in England. In all these cases, with- 
out further ceremony, their discharge is refused. Some- 
times their lordships, in a vein of humor, inform the agent 
that the man has been discharged as unsei-viceahle . 
Sometimes in a sterner tone, they say he was an impostor ; 
or perhaps by way of consolation to his relatives and 
friends, they report that he has fallen in battle against 
nations in amity Xvith his country. Sometimes they 
coolly return that there is no such man on hoard the ship, 
and w^iat has become of him, the agony of a wife and 
children in his native land may be left to conjecture. 
When all these and many other such apologies for refusal 
fail, the native American seaman is discharged." What 
American but may be detained by one or the other of 
these apologies, especially if he be out of sight, as it is 
their policy to put them, losing no time to ship them 
from ship to ship, that their track may be lost ; then 
they say, '■'■there is no such man on boa?'d.''* What will 
the public think of the declarations of the addressers 
and Dr. Osgood, in view of this list of apologies ? 

Thr next thing I would take notice of, found in 
the writings of the British friends calculated to deceive 
the people, is, their endeavour to wipe oft' the odium 
from the British ministry in influencinsr the savas:cs to 
hostilities against us. The addressers say in page 6 — 
"Without any express act of Congress, an expedition 
VvTiS last year set on foot and prosecuted into the Indian 
territory, Avhich had been relinquished by treaty on the 
part of the United States. And now we are told about 
the agency of British traders as to Indian hostilities." 
The argument of the addressers here, is simply this. 
There is no need of lookinsr abroad for influence to 
put the sa\'ages m a hostile attitude against us ; seeing, 
without any express act of Congress, an expedition was 
set on foot and prosecuted into the Indian territory, 
which had been relinquished by treaty on the part of the 
U. States.*' This argument goes to exculpate the Brit- 
ish, and implicate our government. Thus this argument 
apj^jcars to be understood by the Rev. Mr. Channing, 
in bis sermon July 23, 18 12, page 9— "When I consider 



23 

vvliat I blush to repeat, the accusation we have brought 
against England without a shadow of proof, that she 
hath stirred up the savages to murder our defenceless 
citizens on the frontiers." 

The Rev. Mr. Thayer retains the same idea also ; see 
his sermon of August 20, 1812 — "With a glowing 
pencil, a high official attempt was made to portray the 
outrage, the barbarities, the carnage, in which the savages 
on our frontiers were actors, and to represent them as 
stimulated to those cruelties by the government of Great. 
Britain. 'I am pained at the heart, I cannot hold my 
peace,' on findnig this 'railing accusation,' brought 
forward without prool', and apparently for the sole pur- 
pose of strengthening a prejudice and of enkindling a 
resentment, which have gone very far towards the dis- 
truction of our liberties." 

Bax why should Mr. Channing blush, and Mr. Thayer's 
heart be pained at this executive suggestion ? Is it be- 
cause the idea wants proof, and therefore an imputation 
on our government, or because it is so full of proof, 
and an imputation on their friends the British '? 

That England has been capable of stirring up the 
savages against us, is no new doctrine. It is an ac- 
knowledged truth that she did so in our last war with her. 
This is one charge alleged against his Britannic Majesty, 
found in our declaration of independence. "He has 
excited domestic insurrections among us, and has en- 
deavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, 
the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of war- 
fare is, an undistinp;uisheddestructionof all ages, sexes, 
and conditions." If then, why may not the same per- 
sons do it now ? Possibly some may endeavour to 
palliate, and say by way of excuse, that we were then 
at war with her. Let that be for an after consideration. 
I believe we have ample evidence, of her counselling, 
aiding and assisting the savages in their wars with u::, 
since that time, when \vq were at peace with her, as ihey 
have been supplied with arms of British manufactory, and 
had artificial Indians as leaders among them ; but in con - 

unction with what evidence the nature of die case will 



admit, I will summon Dr. Osgood as a v.itiiess upon 
this case, vvho is reputed by you, with boldness, freely 
to speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 
truth. The Dr. appears with the sacred oath upon him, 
solemnly before GOD, even in his sanctuary. His 
affidavit is made and written in a testimony which he 
bore on the 19th day of November, 1795, thus, 
"Chagi-incd with disappointment in the object of the 
w^ar, and mortified with the advantages which they had 
been forced to concede at the peace ; the British gov- 
ernment were on the watch for a plausible pretext to 
' evade or delay the complete execution of the treaty. 
Too soon this pretext was afforded them.*' "They 
availed themselves of what they considered as an infrac- 
tion on our part, to excuse a yet greater on theirs — in 
keeping possession of the western posts, a7id there/)?/ 
facihtating the mi-oads of hostile savages upon our de- 
fenceless fron tiers. ' ' 

Here then, Rev. gentlemen, we see, that with this 
plenary evidence in this trial, more than two or three 
witnesses agreeing, and none contradicting, and all 
circumstances corroborating, the jury, the people, instant- 
ly bring in their verdict guilt?/, as it respects the British 
government, and find that they have been capable 
not only in time of war, but, also, in time of peace, of 
instigating the savages cruelly to murder, tomahawk, 
and scalp innocent families, m.others, and children, and 
that too, when they were in the best and most favorable 
situation to prevent it, viz. when they held possession 
of our military posts, on our frontiers ! We will now, 
if you have patience, attend to the recent case. The 
charge runs thus, "In reviev/ing the conduct of Great 
Britain towards the United States, our attention is neces- 
sarily drawn to the \varflire just renewed by the savages 
on one of our extensive frontiers; a warfare whicli^ is 
known to spare neither age nor sex, and to be distin- 
guished by features peculiarly shocking to humanity. It 
is difficult to account for the activity and combinations 
which have for some time been dev-elopliig themselves 
among the tribes in constant intercourse with Eritish 



25 

traders and garrisons, without connecting their iio^ity 
with that influence ; and without recollecting the 
authenticated examples of such interpositions heretofore 
furnished by the officers and agents of that government." 
In this charge the British government are taken on 
suspido?}-, it runs no higher than tliat, "it is difficult to 
account for/* Sec. Now on trial let us see whether 
there be not reasonable groimds for this suspicion. If 
there be not, the accuser is in the fault, and found over 
jealous. The first circumstance which I shall name, as 
laying a foundation for this suspicion, I will give you, as 
I read it in the Universal Gazette, printed in Washington 
City, No. 760. '"''And noiv*'' exclaim the addressers, 
"we are told about the agency of British traders as to 
Indian hostifities." That, to be sure, is an affecting thing ; 
to tell such men as these pamphleteers show themselves 
to be, "now," or at any time, about the "agency of 
British traders" in stirring up the Indians r.gainst us, is 
quite enough to wound their delicate sensibilities. But, 
nevertheless, when the federal gentlemen signed their 
address, there had been printed and laid before them a 
report from the war office, containing extracts of official 
letters addressed to that department, from officers com- 
manding military posts, and others on the Indian fron- 
tiers, apprizing government of hostile combinations 
among the Indian tribes, fostered and fomented by the 
British. These letters embrace a period of four years, 
from the 24th of May, 1807, to the 23d of November, 
1811 ; and the very first one is from Capt. Dunham, 
then of the U. States' army, dated at Michilimackinack, 
the same person of that name, who now publishes a vi- 
rulent party paper, somewhere in the State of Vermont, 
and who, so long ago as 1807, wrote to the Secretary of 
War, diat "there could be no doubt that the object and 
intention of this second Adam, (meaning the Prophet) 
under the pretence of restoring to the aborigines tlicir 
former independence, and the savage character its ancient 
energies, is in reality, to induce a general elTort to rolli/ 
and to strike somewhere a desperate blow.''' All the 
letters corroborate \vliat is represented by Crpt. Dun- 

4. 



•Of 



S8 

ham; and most of them state in substance that "the 
powerful influence of the British has been exerted in a 
way aUuring to the savage character.'* The letters are 
from men of diflferent politics, separated from each other 
by great distances, and all writing to the head of the 
War-Office, at dates unknown to each other. They 
cannot be suspected of combining to support, by false 
iAtelligence, measures of government not at the time in 
contemplation. It was upon authentic information of 
this kind that administration acted, when it ordered troops 
to Vincennes, whence they proceeded to the Wabash ; 
not with wantonly hostile intentions towards the Indians, 
as the addressers insinuate ; but, as a committee of 
Congress on Indian affairs reported on the 13th of June, 
1812, in pursuance of the provisions of the act of Con- 
gress entitled "An act for calling forth the militia to 
execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, 
and repel invasions, in order to establish a new post on 
the Wabash, and to march against and disperse [with- 
out bloodshed] the armed combination under the Pro- 
phet. In this part of their discussion, the addressers are 
guilty of one of those little verbal artifices, several of 
which are to be found in their performance : they say 
that the expedition to the Wabash w^as set on foot 
"without any express act of Congress ;" nor in truth, 
was there any "express" act made for the occasion ; 
the act in existence, relative to invasions, Sec. fully jus- 
tifying the measure.* The Prophet had assembled his 

* The Wabash exj)edition of Nov. 18H, precisely corresponds 
>vith the policy of President Washington, in the year 1790. In 
his message to Congress, on the 8th of December, of that year, he 
says, "It has been heretofore known to Congress, Ihat frequent 
incnrsioiis have been made on our frontier settlements by certain 
banditti of Indians, from the northwest side of the Ohio. These, 
with some of the tribes dwelling on and near the Wabash, have of 
late been particularly active in tJieir depredations, &c. These 
aggravated provocations rendered it essential to the safety of the 
western settlements, that tlie aggressors should be made sensible, 
that the government of the Union is not less capable of punishing 
their crimes, than it is disposed to respect their rights and reward 
their attachment. As this object could not be effected by defer.- 



27 

bands' ready to fall upon our frontiers : Gov. HanisoiA 
marched, not to make war, but peaceably to disperse 
the Indians if he could. The battle of Tippecanoe proves 
that the inclinations of the Indians were hostile, as the 
event shewed that they were well prepared for action. 
It v/as the fault of the Indians, and not of the adminis- 
tration, that the expedition and the battle took place. 
The Prophet first threatened invasion, and first commen- 
ced the fight. 

As associated ideas are connected, so it has always 
been considered, that a war with England would produce 
one with the savages. In the year 1795, Mr. Ames, in 
Congress, when pleading for the appropriations to be 
made to carry into effect the British treaty, considered a 
failure in it would produce a war with England, and in 
contemplating the distresses thereof, he combined the 
horrors and b'oody scenes of the tomahavv^k and scalp- 
ing-knife. The association of his ideas naturally flow- 
ed from what our country had experienced from the 
resentment of England. And at the battle of Tippeca- 
noe, it was found that the savages vv^ere armed with new 
guns and rifles of the British manufactory ; and that they 
are now stimulated by the British, and fighting with 
them, against us, is conceded. Now do not all these 
circumstances give reasonable grounds of suspicion^ 
that the hostilities of the savages proceeded irom the 
British influence ? — This is more than probable, as a 
recapitulation of the arguments will show. The Con- 
gress of 1776 brings this charge against the ministry of 
England. Dr. Osgood bears witness that the British, in 
holding our posts on our frontiers, contrary to the arti- 
cles of peace, and before 1794, facilitated the inroads of 

sive moasiires, it became necessary to ])u< in force the act which 
empowers the President to call out the militia for the protection of 
the frontiers : And I have accordingly airthorised an expedition, 
in which the regnlar troops in that quarter are combined w ith such 
drafts of militia as were deemed Sufficient.'' Thus under Wash- 
ington, as nnder Madison, tliere was no "express"' act ; in both 
cases the executive acted under a previously existing law. There 
is a great similitude in all the leading points, between the expedi- 
tion of Uarmer, in 1790, and that of Harrison, in. 181 1. 



2S 

the hostile savages on our defenceless frontiers.' Our 
government have received official communications from 
officers commanding forts in different places affirming 
that by the British influence the Prophet was exciting 
the Indians to hostilities ; the Prophet had actually 
many warriors of diffirrent tribes collected ; Gov. 
Harrison pacifically met them, with a proposition for a 
conference. The Prophet commenced actual hostilities 
— they are found to be supplied with British arms and 
ammunition. All these circumstances support the idea 
of the British influence in the hostilities of the savages 
beyond bare suspicion. If the savages had had any mat- 
ter of complaint against us, it is reasonable to suppose 
they would have suggested it ; but I have never heard 
that they have made any complaint, or brought any 
allegations against our people or government, as the 
ground of their present war with us, so that we have 
all the evidence of their being stimulated to the war 
by British influence, that the nature of the case will 
admit, and all that could possibly be expected without 
a mere accident, as the British intrigue for dividing us 
was disclosed by Henry. 

In view of this evidence, it is easy to call to mind the 
language of Mr. Channing upon this subject ; it is page 
9 — "When 1 consider, what I blush to repeat, the accu- 
sation which we have brought against England, zvithoiit 
a shadow of proof ^ that she has stirred up the savages to 
murder our defciiceless citizens on the frontier." Here 
we have, not the shadow only, but even the substance of 
proof. If Mr. Channing be in the habit of blushing, it is 
presumed that he will increase it, by reflecting on this, his 
false and criminating assertion. And the Rev. Mr. 
Thayer is still more to be pitied. He is contemplating 
the same idea in page 7 — "I am pained at my heart, 1 
cannot hold my peace, on finding this railing accusation 
brought forward witliout proof." What will the heart 
felt pain of this Reverend gentleman be, in view of the 
plenary evidence we have of this atrocious and cruel 
conduct of the British ministry ? We may well con- 
clude, from the evidence here produced, that the Presi- 



29 

dent might with propriety have expressed something fiir 
beyond a bare suspicion^ in the case of the British influ- 
ence in stirring up the hostiUties of the savages against 
us. And even now, since hostihties actually exist, from 
what principle can the British justify themselves, in em- 
ploying such a mode of warfare against us as the sava- 
ges carry on ? I'he laws of all civilized nations Ibrbid 
it, and the laws of Christianity do not justify it. What 
would be thought and said of the government of the U. 
States, if they should retaliate on the British, and con- 
trary to, and in contempt of all the feelings of humanity, 
hire certain banditti, to penetrate the British territories, 
tomahawk, scal}>, and destroy without distinction of 
lion- age and dotage ? O ye falsely called "Bulwark" 
of the mild religion of the blessed Saviour, let Pagans 
blush at your acknowledged conduct ! 

In this connexion I will still pursue that litde decep- 
tive verbal artifice of the thirty-four addressers in its con- 
sequences. Page 6 — "Without any express act of 
Congress an expedition was set on foot," &c. The 
Rev. iVIr. Thayer, by this declaration of the addressers, 
is enabled to understand and comprehend the meaning of 
a certain clause in the proclamation of his Excellency 
Gov. Strong, for our fast, issued the 26th of June last. 
This is manifest from Mr. Thayer's own words, page 
7— "By this charge an act of perfidy has been brought 
to light, which, but for this, might have been buried in 
oblivion. It rests on the resnonsibilitv of thirtv-four 
members of our national government, whose character 
for veracity is irreproachable ; that 'without any express 

■^ct of Congress an expedition was last year set on foot 
mto the Indian territory, which had been relinquished 
by treaty on the part of the United States.' Till I 
came to a knowledge of this fact, I could not fully com- 
prehend this petition we were instructed to prefer in the 
proclamation for the last fast — "that He v/ould dispose 
the people of these states, to do justice to the Indian 
tribes, to enlighten, and not exterminate them," With 
a knowledq-e of this instance of treacherv, we need not 

^ look to a foreign nation for a cause of the hostility and 



30 

barbari^'y of a race of beings, who, by the sacredness 
which they attach to all pledges and treaties, loudly 
admonish civilized nations to respect Avhatsoever things 
are true and honest." Mr. Thayer, it seems, perfectly 
understood the addressers as they implicated our execu- 
tive ; they planted tlie bitter root of deception ; his 
Excellency Gov. Strong watered it, and the Rev. Mr, 
Thayer has produced the fruit, in boldly charging our 
government with an "instance of treachery,*' and fix this 
as the cause of the hostilities of the savages. The words 
of the addressers are more buttered than their followers ; 
"but the poison of asps is under their lips." If a char- 
itable Christian minister among us, such as Mr. Thayer, 
could find in that sentence of his Excellency's procla- 
mation, "treachery" in our government, and a violation 
of their faith with the savages, and a desire to extermi- 
nate them ; what will an invidious interpreter amongst 
them, belonging to the nation with which we are at war, 
find in it, to whet their resentment, and to stir up ail 
their savage fury against us, for the noble purpose of se- 
curinsT their existence. This the savasres must believe, 
when they are informed that the sentiment proceeded 
from the governor of Massachusetts, who is a wise man, 
and knows the evil designs of Congress against them," 
and being a friend of his red brethren, and friendly 
towards their great Father the king, has published it in 
a proclamation to tlie people. When his Excellency 
shall, for once consider, that this ill-fated sentence may 
be (which is more than probable) the occasion of moth- 
ers and their tender babes suffering the pains of death 
under the torturinsi; savaee hand, how will he rue the in- 
considerate, unguarded moment which gave that senti- 
ment publicity ; iind that too, v/hen the insinuation was 
as unfounded, as detrimental and cruel ? 

It appears to me, that there is something deceptive in 
the sentiment of the addressers, with respect to the ne- 
cessity or grounds of the war. Or at least they darken 
counsel with words without knowledge. Page 6, they 
siiy, "It appears to t!ie undersigned, that the wrongs of 
which the United States have to complain, althou^^h in/ 



31 

some respects very grievous to our interests, and in 
many, humiliating to our pride, were yet of a nature, 
which, in the present state of the world, either would 
not justify war, or which war would not remedy. 
Thus, for instance, the hovering of British vessels upon 
our coasts, and the occasional insults to our ports, impe- 
riously demand such a systematic application of harbor 
and sea coast defence, as would repel such aggressions ; 
but in no light, can they be considered as making a 
resort to war, at the present time, on the part of the U. 
States, either necessary or expedient." There appears 
to be something a little enigmatical in this sentence. 
"The hovering of British vessels upon our coasts, and 
the occasional insults to our ports, imperiously demand 
such a systematic application of harbor and sea coast 
defence, as would repel such aggressions.*' What are 
our harbor and sea coast defence ? Our forts and navy. 
What is a systematic application of them ? To apply 
them to the use for which they were made, viz. to let 
off our cannon in our defence. But in what degree ? 
So as would repel such aggressions. What next fol- 
lows ? This — "but, in no light, can they be considered 
as making a resort to war^ at the present time, on the 
part of the U. States, either necessary, or expedient." 
What, when these aggressions imperiously demand an 
application of our harbor and sea coast defence ? I 
always thought this was the essence of war ; but in no 
light is it so considered by the addressers — this is mys- 
terious — to me it is a riddle deserving a place in Thom- 
as* Alm.anack ; and I presume any of us would gladly 
wait for the next year for a satisfactory solution. 

Another item in which the addressers and other 
federal writers have conveyed erroneous ideas to the peo- 
ple, is with respect to the suppression of debate on the 
important question of- war. As answer to what the 
addressers have said on this subject I give you as fol- 
lows. "This pamphlet tells us, that, on the momen- 
tuous question of war with G. Britain, the right of pub- 
lic debate, in the face of the world, and especially their 
constituents, has been denied to the representatives." 



33 

Here it is admitted that the right of debate was not pre- 
cluded ; that only it was not permitted "in the face of 
the ivorld, and especially of constituents." And be- 
cause they could not talk in the face of the world, the 
federal gentlemen would not talk at all. Now, when 
we consider that all congressional argument, to be cfiec- 
tive, must operate to the conviction of the re]:)resentative 
body alone, it would seem that a debate with closed 
doors would be the most desirable of all thinscs for a 
good logician ; because, in that case, he would have 
the members by themselves, and instill into them the 
persuasive deductions of his reasoning. If therefore 
the federal gentlemen did not like this closed door op- 
portunity of debate, it shows that their object was not 
to convince the understandings of the Representatives of 
the people, and thereby prevent the war, but that their 
debate was to influence the passions of the people them- 
selves. There was no hindrance to debate when the 
doors were shut ; but the federalists themselves "decli- 
ned discussion." This admission is fatal to their argu- 
ment. At page 4, of this federal address, will be found 
the foUowinG: confession : "The intention to wasre war 
and invade Canada, had been long since openly avowed. 
The object of hostile menace had been ostentatiously an- 
nounced." The reader is desired to mark this passage, 
mid to impress it on his mind, that the federalists ac- 
knowledge the determination to go to war had been for 
a long time, announced ; openly avowed by the major- 
ity. Indeed every body must remember the fact : for 
the avowal was treated with much ridicule by the op- 
position both in and out of Congress. Well, then ; the 
resolution to go to war with Great Britain was avowed, 
the federalists admit that it had been, lojig before the se- 
cret part of the session, avowed openly mid ostentatiously, 
yet what did these same federalists do when that avowal 
was made? The doors were open then; they might 
have spoken in the face of the world, and of their con- 
stituents at that time. Did they do so ? No ! They 
were dumb. It was their marked policy to be sihmt. 
The truth of this is notorious. At Washington, when 



as 

the doors of Congress xvere open, when the question of 
war was fully announced, when the committee of foreign 
relations made their report in part, when every measure 
proposed on the side of the majority inevitably led to 
war ; what was the conduct of those federal addressers 
then ? Why — let them blush, if they can — caricaturing 
a legislator that stood up for the countrv ; they were 
giving countenance to two or three caricaturists at Wash- 
ington, who were employed to depict Mr. Porter on the 
back of a terrapin ! This was the occupation of honor- 
able men, when the doors of Congress Ti}€7'e open — yes, 
open in the face of the world, in the face of their constit- 
uents, and when the subject of war was stated "as for 
debate." The republicans invited discussion : they 
spoke on the topic ; and spoke so much without being 
answered by the opposition, that a republican member, 
(I think it was Mr. Bibb, of Georgia) threatened to call 
xh^ previous question on his own political friends, if they 
did not decline further speaking, seeing that the federal 
representatives had decided not to speak at all. Thus 
the federal gentlemen not only declined discussion" when 
the doors were shut ; but they "declined discussion" 
when the doors were open. When the question of war 
came up — not for discussion, but for decision — these very 
same men, who had waved the right of debate at the 
proper period of the session — these very same men, who, 
for at least six months^ had had a fair opportunity to speak 
to the subject, complained of tyranny, because, when 
the moment to act had arrived, that moment to which 
the majority had uniformly pointed from the commence- 
ment of the session, the opposition were not allowed to 
waste in idle debate the precious time of Congress, and 
array by inflammatory harangues, a party out of doors, 
against the constituted authorities ! And what greater 
occasion was there for discussion at last than at first ? 
None. The addressers, at page 4, confess that, "Ab 
one reason for war was ijitimated, but such as was of a 
nature public and Jiotorious P* If all the reasons for war 
were notorious before the doors of Congress were shut, 
and the- federal members refused to discuss the question 



then, with what face can they conjure up a necessity for 
subsequent debate, and cry out danger to freedom ! from 
a temporary secret session? Why, if they would not 
speak when the sul^ject was open for discussion, did they 
think it tyrannical to close the doors upon them when 
the question was proposed for decision ? Yet, in fact, 
there was no infringement of the right of debate. The 
pamphlet does not say there was. It concedes that the 
federal gentjemen might have spoken on the subject of 
the war, both in open and secret session ; but they 
would speak on neither occasion. They complain then 
of their own negligence. If men will not speak when 
doors are open, and will not speak when they are shut, 
what propriety is there in a complaint of closed doors ? 

The whole of this complaint of the addressers is 
couched in terms calculated to deceive the people. 
They do not say they were denied the freedom of debate, 
only in a qualified manner. By an artful combination of 
words, they have conveyed an idea to the people, which 
their address, taken together, will contradict ; yet the 
root of deception has vegetated, it has taken eifect, and 
brought forth its baneful fruit in Dr. Osgood ; in his 
Protest, page 14, he observes, "Attempts will first be 
made to bridle the tongues and pens of the opponents. 
This has been done in Congress already, while the war 
question was imder debate ; it was by gagging the mouth 
of a Randolph, and other enlightened patriots, that the 
act passed.'* How astonishing that the reverend doctor 
should retain such sentiments ! I never have heard that 
Mr. Randolph has made any complaint, on the ground 
oi i\\Q freedom of debate, notwithstanding his propensity 
to loquacity. I have always- understood Mr. Randolph 
to be a gentleman possessed of very considerable powers 
and penetration of mind ; and this is the only reason, I 
can render, why his name is not entered on the list of 
the thirty- four addressers. 

Another instance in which the adherents of Great 
Britain in this country have deceived our fellow- citizens, 
is, relative to the sincerity of our government, to adjust 
existing differences with England, and especially upon 



35 

the subject of impressment. Tb.e addressers in their 9th 
page recur to certain documents, "that the real state of this 
real question may be understood ;" they say, "Mr. King, 
our minister in England, obtained a disavowal of the 
British government of the right to impress "American 
seamen," naturalized as well as natives, on the high seas. 
An arrangement had advanced nearly to a conclusion on 
this basis, and was broken off only because Great Britain 
insisted to retain the right on the "narrow seas." What 
however, was the opinion of the American minister on 
the probability of an arrangement, appears from the pub- 
lic documents communicated to Congress, in the session 
of 1808, as stated by Mr. Madison in these words : "At 
the moment the articles were expected to be signed, an 
exception of the 'narrow seas' was urged and insisted 
on by Lord St. Vincent, and being utterly inadmissible 
on our part, the negotiation was abandoned." Mr. King 
seems to be of opinion, however, "that with more time 
than was left him for the experiment, the object might 
have been overcome.'* This, Rev. gentlemen, is a part 
of what the addressers have offered, "that the real state 
of the question may be understood." And it seems 
that the Rev. Mr. Channing has so understood it. In 
pages 8 and 9, he observes thus, "When I consider our 
unwillingness to conclude an arrangement with her, on 
that very difficult and irritating subject of impressment, 
notwithstanding she proffered such an one as our own 
minister at that court, and our present secretary of state 
declared "was both honorable and advantageous to the 
United States." Now, Rev. gentlemen, I beg liberty 
to say, "that the real state of the question may be under- 
stood," that this is of a piece with the rest of the British 
negotiations with us. In them she ncvej^ desired to come 
to any equitable settlement wilh the United States. She 
has exercised her policy towards us, made professions 
of great desires that all existing difficulties might be 
amicably adjusted, always ready to negotiate, and when 
negotiation was protracted to the greatest length, nnd as 
much time as possible consumed, she comes upon the 
point of conclusion, and just ready to sign the articles 



of agreement ; and thus keeping America agape, tanta- 
lizing them with dekisive expectations, till the signatures 
must be affixed ; then all at once, and well thought of 
too, the court of admiralty must be consulted. Lord 
St. Vincent insists upon an exception of the "narrow 
seas,'* and this being utterly inadmissible on our part, 
the negotiation is abandoned. What would any adjust- 
ment of the subject be to us, if we should concede to 
impressment upon the "narrow seas," through which 
almost all our navigation passes ? It has been the mani- 
fest policy of the cabinet of England, to lead our nego- 
tiations and our country to believe they are nearer a close 
of amicable adjustment of differences, than they think 
themselves to be. This is apparent from the documents 
transmitted by the President to Congress, November 
18, 1812. Mr. Russell, in giving a narrative of the con- 
versation he had with Lord Castlereagh, in which con- 
versation Lord Castlereagh communicated to Mr. Russell 
as follows : "The question of impressment," he w^ent 
on to observe, "was attended with difficulties, of which 
neither I, nor my government appeared to be aware. 
"Indeed,'' he continued, "there has evidently been much 
misapprehension on this subject, and an erroneous belief 
entertained that an arrangement, in regard to it, has been 
nearer an accomplishment than the facts will warrant." 
Even our friends in Congress, I mean (observing perhaps 
some alteration in my countenance) those who were op- 
posed to going to war with us, have been so confident 
in this mistake, that they have ascribed the failure of such 
an arrangement solely to the 7nisconduct of the American 
government. This error probably originated with Mr. 
King, for being much esteemed here, and always well 
received by the persons then in power, he seems to have 
misconstrued their readiness to listen to his representa- 
tions and their warm professions of a disposition to remove 
the complaints of America, in relation to impressment, 
into a supposed conviction on their part of the propriety 
of adopting the plan he had proposed. But Lord St. 
Vincent, whom he might have thought he had brought 
over to his opinion, appears never for a moment to have 



37 

eeased to regard all arrangement on the subject to be 
attended with formidable, if not insurmountable obstacles. 
This is obvious from a letter which his lordship 
addressed to Sir William Scott at the time. Here Lord 
Castlereagh read a letter contained in the records before 
him, in which Lord St. Vincent states to Sir Wm. Scott, 
the zeal \vith whicii Mr. King had assailed him on the 
subject of impressment, confesses his own perplexity and 
total incompetency to discover any practical project for 
the safe discontinuance of the practice, and asks for coun- 
sel and advice. "Thus you see,** proceeded Lord Cas- 
tlereagh, "that the conjidence of Mr. King on this point 
was entirely unfounded.*'* Is not thi^ document. Rev. 
gentlemen, a sufficient answer to all the objections which 
have been made against the administrators of our gov- 
ernment, touching their insincerity in negotiating on the 
subject of impressment ? Here it is. apparent that the 
British negotiators acted with duplicity and deceit ; and 
answered their purposes of policy in it ; so long as we 
would negotiate with them, we gave them opportunity to 
depredate upon us, to make what interest thev could in 
this country, to have their amicable dispositions published 
in all their papers in the United States, and to cast the 
odium of non-agreement upon our government ; and so 
far were they successful as that thirty-four members of 
Congress were found capable of giving publicity to the 
hurtful error. 

This is not the only instance of British contrivance to 
give their friends in this country a pretext to disseminate 
black suspicions of insincerity in our executive to 
amicable adjustments of differences with England. A 
treaty formed and consented to by our ministers Messrs. 
Monroe and Pinkney, must,, before it be presented to 
our government for ratification, have an inadmissible 
article added to it, which our negotiators objected to in 
the time of it, with declarations, that it could not be 
received. The treaty arrives with its inadmissible 
addition. Mr. Jefferson then being president, thought 
not proper to lay it before the Senate for their advice 
and consent. This treaty then, by the friends of En^- 



38 

land, was spoken of in general terms as being very ad- 
vantageous to us, without ever hinting at the inadmissi- 
ble article ; and onr government spoken of in the 
British papers in this country, as being totally destitute 
of an amicable disposition toward England. Is it un- 
reasonable to suppose that the British ministry had 
sagacity sufficient in the outset of these negotiations, to 
foresee tneir general progress' and terminations : that 
the subject of impressment must finally be referred to 
the board of admiralty, and that they would except the 
^'narrow seas," and also that the inadmissible article 
must be added ? With respect to the subject of im- 
pressment, it is granted that England never pretended 
to the right of impressing our men ; but of what con- 
sequence are those professions, as long as she makes a 
constant practice of it ? The addressers in page 8, 
say, "The claim of Great Britain pretends to no further 
extent, that to take British seamen from private mer- 
chant vessels. In the exercise of this claim, her officers 
take American seamen, and foreign seamen, in the 
American service ; and although she disclaims such 
Abuses, and proffisrs redress, when known, yet, undoubt- 
edly, grievous injuries have resulted to the seamen of the 
United States ; but the question is, can war be proper 
for such cause, before all hope of reasonable accommoda- 
tion has failed ? Even after the extinguishment of such 
hope, can it be proper, until our own practice be so 
regulated as to remove, in such foreign nation, any 
reasonable apprehension of injury ?" It is highly in- 
sulting for us to be told by the British ministry, that 
their claim pretends to no liirther extent than to take 
British seamen ; although this may be true on paper, 
while their officers take A\hom they please with their 
approbation. Their officers take whom they choose, 
720^ under so much as Jt suspicion of their being British 
subjects ; but under a pretext only of their being such. 
Were it as they pretend, that they are British subjects, 
and deserters from their service, they would be brought 
to trial, condemned and executed according to their 
laws ; and not as soon as possible be shifted from one 



39 

ship to another, to be sent out of heanng, upon some 
foreign station. Who .ever heard of their executing 
any for desertion, except our oxun citizens whom they 
had previously impressed, and by duress compelled to 
enlist and take the bounty ; who after that deserted from 
them, and the British by information from their friends 
here, received intelligence of them, seized, condemned, 
and executed them, as in the case of Wilson, taken 
out of the Chesapeak, and executed at Halifax. The 
British officers receive the caresses and approbation of 
the ministry, for valiantly perpetrating those "disclaim- 
ed*' acts of hostility against us. The officer who does 
the best repair, and keeps his complement of men the , 
fullest, is the best fellow. Who ever heard of one of 
the British officers receiving their disapprobation for 
their errors in impressment ? Nor yet, for any other 
injury their "rashness" might lead them to do us, even 
in the murder of Pierce, or the attack on the Chesapeak, 
unauthorised acts on paper, but approved by the minis- 
try, in their countenancing, and promoting those officers 
to higher command. So deceptive and hollow-hearted 
is England, in all things to us. This is a complaint our 
government have against them — see the President's mes- 
sage, June 18, 1812. "British cruisers have been in the 
practice also of violating the rights and the peace of our 
coasts. They hover over and harass our entering and 
departing commerce. To the most insulting pretensions 
they have added the most lawless proceedings in our 
very harbors : and have wantonly spilt American blood 
within the sanctuary of our territorial jurisdiction. 
The principles and rules enforced by that nation, when 
a neutral nation, against armed vessels of belligerents 
hovering near her coast, is well known. When 
called on nevertheless, by the United States to punish 
the greater offences committed by her own vessels, her 
government has bestozved o?i their commanders additional 
?narks of honor qnd confidence.^'' 

The addressers,, in page 8, on the subject of impress* 
ment, observe thus — "But the question is, can war be 
proper for such a cause, before all hope of reasonal)ie 



40 

accommodation has failed ? Even after extinguishment 
of such hope, can it be proper, until our own practice 
be so regulated as to remove, in such foreign nation, 
any reasonable apprehension of injury V Why can- 
not the British government so regulate her practice of 
impressment, as to remove all reasonable apprehension 
of injuring us? The answer is, there is such a similarity 
between the American citizens, and British subjects, 
that it is impossible to discriminate. Very well ; how 
then shall our government regulate our practice in favor 
of England ? For my logic infers, that there is as great 
a likeness between the British subjects and the citizens 
of the United States, as there is between the citizens of 
the United States and the British subjects. What duty, 
therefore, can our fellow citizens be made to believe our 
government have neglected in this respect ? 

xVnother instance in which federal writings have 
been calculated to deceive the people, respects the repeal 
or modification of the French Berlin and Milan decrees, 
as they respected our trade. Our government gave the 
two belligerents to understand, that if either of them 
would so repeal, or modify their obnoxious edicts, as 
that they should not affect our trade, an intercourse would 
be opened with that power, so doing, and closed with 
the delinquent one, if that also did not do the same in 
three months after our president had made proclamation 
of such repeal or modification. England alleges that 
France was first in the wrong, and must therefore be 
first in relinquishing her decrees, and that England stood 
ready and would relinquish her orders in council in the 
same degree, pari passu, or in equal pace. France re- 
peals her decrees as they respected the commerce of the 
United States only, which was all that our government 
did or could with propriety require of her ; while they 
remained in full force as they respected other neutrals. 
This being communicated to our government, the 
president made proclamation thereof, and urged upon 
England a repeal of her orders in council as they respect- 
ed the United States. * But then Ensrland recedes from 
her engagements, and by Mr. Foster, her resident minis- 



tcr here, gives us to understand in a letter addressed to 
Mr. Monroe on the 10th of June last, thus, "I have no 
hesitation, sir, in saying, that Great Britain, as the case 
has hitherto stood, never did, nor ever could, engage to 
repeal her orders as afFecting America alone, leaving them 
in force against other states, upon condition that France 
would except singly and specially America from the 
operation of her decrees." Though at first there were 
cavilings made with respect to the evidence of France 
having relinquished her decrees, as they respected the 
United States, when the evidence was such as is usual 
in such cases between nations, and such as we have re- 
ceived from England, by the medium of ministers, yet 
they insisted upon the written instrument, until the em- 
peror in condescension was pleased to give it. Then 
Britain and her adherents undertook the denial of the 
reversion of the French decrees upon the broad ground 
of their being repealed absolutely and unconditionally 
with respect to all nations as well as this ; a thing which 
our government never did, nor could with propriety ask 
of them ; and what they have never affirmed ; but that 
they were modified only so as not to injure us — and the 
denial of the repeal of the French decrees, on this broad 
ground, is the part which the congressional addressers 
have taken, where tliey have none to contradict them. 
But thev convey an idea to their constituents as if those 
French decrees were not repealed as respects the United 
States, and so calculated to deceive the people. Perhaps 
this has contributed to excite the irritation of Dr. Osgood 
to such a pecuhar degree. The Doctor talks roundly 
upon the subject in the 11th page of his Solemn Protest, 
"As the British orders were professedly occasioned by 
the French decrees, it was expected that they would be 
revoked on the repeal of those decrees." This is granted, 
that they would, "pari passu." The Doctor proceeds — 
"Our government, having proclaimed that repeal, demand* 
ed the revocation of the British orders. England replied 
that we were mistaken in our assertions of the repeal of 
the French decrees, and, in proof of our mistajke, pro-, 
^uccd official documents of the French j^cvernirient. 



42 

explicitly contradictitig our proclamation, and affirming 
that those decrees, so tar from being repealed, were the 
fundamental la\^'s of the French empire, and therefore 
were not and never could be repealed." Could not 
those decrees be the fundamental laws of the French 
empire, in a restricted sense, and yet be repealed as they 
respected the United States ? The Doctor proceeds — 
"and therefore were not and never could be repealed." 
This is something singular, when the decrees contained 
a provision in themselves, to become null and void on 
the occurrence of a certain event, viz. as neutral nations 
should resist those orders in council, and cause them- 
selves to be respected, the French decrees ceased to 
have effect upon them. The Doctor surely must either 
have never known or forgotten this. The Rev. gentle- 
man proceeds — "She urged further, that ourselves knew 
that they were not repealed, by the almost daily loss of 
our ships and cargoes in consequence of their continued 
execution ; as since the period of their pretended repeal, 
scores, if not hundreds of our vessels had been seized in 
French ports, or burnt at sea by French cruisers, while 
many of their unoffending crews were manacled like 
slaves, confined in French prisons, or forced on board 
of French ships to fight against England." The Doctor 
forgot to tell us those vessels and crews, thus roughly 
handled in French ports, were British crews sailing 
under the fag of the United States with their forged 
papers. The Doctor now comes to the point. "In 
opposition, however, to all those proofs, our government, 
with an hardihood and effrontery, at which demons might 
have blushed, persisted in asserting the repeal." 

Here, Rev. gentlemen, you see the difference in those 
assertions which are called contradictory ; the British 
and their friends affirm those decrees are not repealed, 
tliat is, on the broad and unlimited ground, before men- 
tioned. Our government do not contradict this ; but 
affirm that they are repealed in a limited manner, espe- 
cially as they res])ected the United States, which was all 
we could ask of France ; and so far they are repealed, 
and the French empire still remains, whatever may bt 



43 

said of their being its fundamental laws ; the Doctor'^ 
commentary thereupon notwithstanding. 

The next thing in which the writings of the federal- 
ists are calculated to deceive the people is, that the war 
proceeds from French influence and a desire to please 
Bonaparte. Here it is not necessary to quote much of 
their language expressive of it — the idea is familiar with 
them. The friends of England have suggested it in 
Congress, their partizans out have been ready loudly 
to proclaim it after them. Dr. Osgood, in page 15 of 
his Protest, observes, when speaking of the authors of 
the war, " Their chosen master, Bojiapaj'te, however, 
must be obeyed at every hazard." I shall not undertake 
to prove a negative. This can never be recjuired of 
any ; it belongs to the accuser to bring forw^^.rd some 
plausible reason at least, for his accusation. The sub- 
ject however may deserve some observations. 

When we consider any man or any body of men 
under an influence to obtain a certain object, or having 
through exertion obtained it, we necessarily consider 
whether it be an ultimate and last end ; or whether it be 
a subordinate end, to obtain one yet future which is the 
last end. To suppose our government should go to 
war with England inerely to please the French emperor, 
is most incongruous ; we must annex some recom- 
pense, object or reward, they have in view equivalent to 
the price they pay for it. The question is, what object 
have our government in pleasing Bonaparte ? Fear his 
ire, they cannot ; a wide ocean separates him from us ; 
and he has neither men nor a navy to annoy us. He has 
no territory contiguous to us to excite the cupidity of 
our rulers, as a rewi.rd for such a measure. And it is 
totally inconceivable that they should do it for money, 
and pocket it among the republican members, and keep 
it a profound secret ; and if they should bring ic into 
the public treasury, they would make a losing go of it. 
Their wages thereby in Congress would not be raised, 
and from their own property they must pay their part 
of the expense of tlie war. And to go to war with Eng.. 
land for the sake of a trade with France, as Dr. Osgood 



44 • 

sii^^ests, is totally inconsistent. If we could have had 
a free trade with both, it is impossible we should go to 
War with either, for the sake of a trade with the other, 
when we might have peaceably enjoyed the trade of 
both. The question then returns, What possible ob- 
ject can our government have in view, in going to war 
with England to * 'please the French emperor, their 
master?" Is his pleasure the ultimate and last end ; 
without therein having in view any consequent favor, 
compensation, reward or object whatever ? It becomes 
gentlemen who make these bold assertions, as if they 
had the whole theory of tlie business in their minds, to 
point out the consistency of them ; or let them blush, if 
they be in the habit of blushing, at these unfounded, se- 
ditious and criminating assertions. Should the question 
be retorted, and it be required to point out any other 
motive which could possibly induce our government to 
go to war with England — it is answered, that England 
has never ceased to exercise a hostile disposition towards 
the United States, since their revolt from her, and ab- 
solving all political connexions with her. She early 
commenced the before unheard of practice of taking by 
force cur citizens to man her navv — she has never ceas- 
cd piratically to depredate upon our commerce at sea — 
she sought a pretext to delay fulfilling the treaty of peace 
with us, and, contrary to its stipulations, held our milita- 
ry posts, and facilitated the depredations of the merci- 
less savages upon our frontiers. She invited our citizens 
to violate the laws of our land, and facilitated the means 
to them, by a royal order. She has been ready to nego- 
tiate, to deceive our people with false views of her ami- 
cable disposition toward us, to cast the blame of non- 
agreement upon our government, and to gain time to 
depredate upon our men and property. She has treated 
with contempt the lawful authority of the United States 
over her own jurisdiction. She has wantonly murdered 
our fellow citizens in our own waters. She has promot- 
ed her officers, the instruments of those outrages, to high- 
er honor and command. She has placed her armed ves- 
sels at the mouths of our harbors, to annov our out and 



45 

home bound trade. While, hi her greatest profe^ons 
of friendship toward us, she has employed her commis- 
sioned agents and spies amongst us, for the purpose of 
disaffecting our people towards their own government, 
and to aid and assist the friends of Britain, in effecting a 
political separation of the United States. She has re- 
fused to comply with her arrangements with us, made by 
her accredited minister, after receiving a fulfilment of 
them on our part, without ever offering a satisfactoiy 
reason for her so doing. She assumes our right of the 
seas to herself, and has laid our commerce under tribute, 
to be regulated, augmented or diminished, according to 
the wisdom and pleasure of his Britannic Majesty. And 
in addition to all this, before our declaration of war 
against Great Britain, to cap the climax of wrongs re- 
ceived from her, it is no presumption to say, that the late 
hostilities of the Indians were in consequence of her in- 
fluence, as it is acknowledged they have been hereto- 
fore, in a time of peace with her. These, reverend gen- 
tlemen, are some of the reasons which are rendered for a 
war with Britain ; which really comprise, being submit- 
ted to without resistance, re-colonization. And are not 
those reasons highly sufficient "? If not, our fathers had 
no reason to contend with England. But it is granted 
on all hands they had, without running to France, to 
bring from thence an influence his Most Christian Ma- 
jesty had over Congress, to oppose the tyrannical preten- 
sions of the British ministry towards us. And they 
who now run there for it, must be considered too gross- 
ly ignorant for writers, or enemies to our sovereignty 
and independence. 

But one more instance M'ill I name (for I am tired 
with this disgusting business) wherein the federal wri- 
ters deceive the people, that is, that in our war with 
England we quit our own ground, and mingle in Euro- 
pean contests, and join our destiny with European na- 
tions. Thus the congressional pamphleteers express 
themselves by quoting the words of Washington in page 
5th — " Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground ? 
Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part 



46 

of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the 
toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, liumour, 
or caprice?" And in page 13th — "Every consideration 
of moral duty and political expedience seems to concur 
in warning the United States, not to 7?imgle in this hope- 
less, and to human eye, interminable European contest." 
To this idea Mr. Channing follows suit wiih a bold 
voice ; -see his fast sermon of July 23, page 13 — when 
speaking of the w^ar he says, "To see it in its true char- 
acter, we must consider against what nation it is rvaged^ 
and with rvhat nation it is connectiriQ' tis.^^ And, "When 

T • 1 • • I 1 ■ 

1 View my country takingpart with the oppressor against 
the nation which has alone arrested his proud career of 
victory." And again, "We are linking ourselves with the 
acknowledged enemy of mankind." Page 14th-^"Into 
contact and communion with this bloody nation, we are 
brought by this war." "This is the nation with whom 
we are called to interweave our destinies." How do 
those bold assertions appear to be true ? We have not 
quitted our own, to stand on foreign ground by declar- 
ing war against England. We contend only for our 
own individual rights. Wc are not intermeddling with 
European contests ; not taking part in any of their 
quarrels. Does our contending with England for the 
sake of our free navigation of the seas, and our sailors' 
rights, imply a treaty offensive and defensive with 
France ? If not, how are v;e connecting ourselves v.utli 
that nation ? We are no more connecting ourselves 
with France in this war, than we should be with any 
of the Barbary powers, or any pagans of the East Indies, 
if they by any means had a quarrel with England res- 
pecting territorial bounds ; or if we also were conten- 
ding with her for territorial bounds, our connexion with 
them no more exists from the similarity of the objects 
for \\\\\q\\ we both contend. And if France be contend- 
ing with England, because England steals her subjects 
from her merchant ships, and prohibits from her her 
national rights to use the seas, and we be contending: 
with her for our rights in the same objects, this is not 
interweaving our destinies with hers. Each party must 



47 

experience the fate of his own quarrel ; one may obtain 
his rights, and the other fail — it is by no means necessa- 
ry that they sink or swim tc^pjether, because they con- 
tend for the same or diiferent objects. *'This is the na- 
tion," says Mr. Channing, with whom we are called on 
to interweave our destinies." But, by what, or by 
whom, are we thus called on ? Not the circumstance 
of our being at war with the same power she is ; this 
does not forbid our being at war with France, before the 
year is at an end. Are we called on by our government 
to interweave our destinies with France ? No, they hav6 
not intimated any such thing, but the contrary .; see 
the President's Message to Congress, June 18,1812. 
"Whether the United States shall continue passive un- 
der these progressive usurpations, and these accumula- 
ting wrongs ; or, opposing force to force in defence of 
their natural rights, shall commit a just cause into the 
hands of the Almighty Disposer of events, avoiding 

ALL CONNEXIONS WHICH MIGHT ENTANGLE IT IN 
THE CONTESTS OR VIEWS OF OTHER POWERS.'* This 

is directly the reverse of interweaving our destinies 
with France or any other power ; nor do I recollect of 
our being called on, by any portion of our citizens for 
this purpose. If then, we be not called on by the 
circumstances of the war, nor by our government, 
nor yet by any portion of our fellow-citizens, to in- 
terweave our destinies with France, we may justly 
conclude xve are not yet called on, however soon 
we may be, to interweave our destinies with France or^ 
any other nation. It is hopeful therefore, that Mr. 
Channins^ and other writers will a little more accuratelv 
study truths and propriety in their next publications 
upon this subject. 

The Rev. Mr. Thayer, in contemplating upon the 
executive suggestion that the British influence might be 
exercised in exciting the hostilities of the savages against 
us, observes thus, page 7, "By this charge an act of 
perfidy has been brought to liglit, which, but for this, 
might have been buried in oblivion. It rests on the 
resDvonsibilitv of thirtv-four members of our national 



48 

government, whose character for veracity is irreproacha- 
ble." When Mr. Thayer and the public shall come to 
consider more maturely tlpt address of the thirty-four 
members of Congress, and see how it has deceived them, 
and how admirably well calculated it is in all its parts to 
deceive the less informed ; and \vhen they consider that 
this circumstance in the address could not exist from 
mere accident, but must be the fruit of labor and design, 
will it not operate, in spite of candor and charity, greatly 
to diminish, if not totally to destroy, that confidence 
which has been reposed in them ? It has, so for as it 
has received circulation, most egregiously deceived many 
honest minds, and greatly strengthened the erroneous ; 
and with its artful cloud of dust, it totally blinds the 
wavering. What awful delusion must their constitu- 
ents be possessed of, if confined to their publications ? 
Such writings as that address, if not treason and felony, 
must be considered a high misdemeanor ; it is adhering 
to and iiivinsi: our enemies aid and comfort with a bold 
hand. The members of our national council are privi- 
leged ; the freedom of debate admits of things being 
spoken on the floor of Congress, which are not suitable 
to publish to the world. Why did not those querulous 
members bring up to view those deceptive ideas con- 
tained in their pamphlet, in their debates in Congress ; 
but because they knew they woidd be so promptly an- 
svv'ered, and their folly so readily exposed, that the people 
would not have been deceived by them, nor would they 
have affected the then approaching Presidential election, 
as sending them among the people, where their folly 
could not so readily be presented to the public view ? 

The next thing in rhetorical order, in federal writings, 
after mis7'ep7'eseiitat'wn, follows defamation. The thirty- 
four pamphleteers lay a foundation for this, by implica- 
tion and consequence. And here it becomes necessary 
again to quote the premises from which the consequence 
is drawn. In page 6, they say, "With respect to the 
Indian war, of the origin of which but very imperfect 
information has as yet been given to the public." Why 
could they not have told their constituents, what infer 



49 * 

mation they had obtained, beginning with Capt. Dun- 
ham's letter, written in 1807, settuit^ forth the British 
influence among the savages, and how our government 
were repeatedly receiving information of the same kind 
from various officers down to the year 1811 ? Perhaps 
this would not have answered their purpose so well ! 
They proceed, "Without any express act of Congress, 
an expedition was last year set on foot, and prosecuted into 
the Indian territory, which had been relinquished by 
treaty on the part of the United States."" Now comes 
the consequence, "and now we are told about the agen- 
cy of British traders, as to Indian hostilities.'''' This is a 
master stroke. They have begotten the ideas and pre- 
sented the ill formed thing, in embryo, to public view ; 
but in a fertile soil. Their numerous pupils have made 
rapid improvements. The idea has grown to the most 
execrating slander. Mr. Thayer in his 7th page predi- 
cates perfidy of our government, thus — "by this charge 
an act oi perfidy is brought to light." And he acknowl- 
edges its origin, thus, " it rests on the responsibility of 
thirty-four members of our national government, whose 
character for veracity is irreproachable." Let it remain 
so ; I presume they are not envied ! The reverend gen- 
tleman proceeds — "Rather therefore, than lift up our 
voice to Heaven, in supplication for a blessing on a war, 
precipitately begun, 2inA founded in unrighteoianesSy let 
us pray," &c. That the war should take place so sud- 
denly, so totally unexpected^ seems to be a circumstance^ 
by the federal writers to attach the greater guilt to our 
rulers. Dr. Osgood, page 3 of his 'Protest-^"The feel- 
ings of every man, capable of the least reflection, must 
be sliocked beyond measure by so sudden and unexpect- 
ed a fall from peace and plenty, into the complicated hor- 
rors of war.'* Page 12 — "It is tlicrelbre the more won- 
derful, and can be accounted for on no other principle, 
but the imperceptible influence which the author of all 
evil, the spirit that workethin the children of disobedi- 
ence, has been permitted to exert in the hearts of dark- 
minded, cool, deliberate, wicked rulers." But how it is 
that these "cool, deliberate, wicked rulers" all at once 



5» 

become frantic, I can't imagine, except, as the Doctor 
observes in page 14, ''Conscious of their guilt and 
danger, but destitute, as fallen angels, of any heart to re- 
pent, party spirit and rage have so worked them up that 
they have at length become desperate, and in a fit ofdes- 
peratmi have proclaimed u'ar." Here defamation of our 
rulers comes out in hard words and round periods, with 
all the majesty and solemnity imaginable. This fit of 
desperation in our rulers contributed to render the exist- 
ence of the war so sudden and unexpected to Dr. Osgood, 
and the Rev. Mr. Laurence — see his sermon of Au- 
gust 20, 1812; page 11th, he observes, "We would 
by no means impede the current of excessive grief, but 
would rather obediently raise our mournful voice, with 
the increasing multitude of genuine patriots, to the cap- 
itol, where the monster War received its unexpected 
birth.^'' .But there seems to be a little something crook- 
ed, running through errors. Dr. Osgood, in his 15 th 
page, speaking of the war, makes this frank confession, 
"My brethren, the blood runs cold in my veins at the 
prospect of the heart chilling scenes before us. The 
thing WQ greatly feared has come upon us." How the 
war should exist, so sudden, and totally unexpected, to 
gentlemen, as taking place in a fit of desperation in our 
rulers, and at the same time so "greatly feared" by them, 
is a little mysterious to me ! I do not understand the 
consistency of their greatly fearing that which was 
totally unexpected ! But then, no matter for that. 
Truth and consistency have been old hampers to writers 
in all ages, and it seems, as if to get rid of the clog, the 
wisdom of some of our n^odern writers had determined 
to let them grow obsolete / There is, however, an apol- 
ogy, which ought in candor to be made for the incon- 
sistency of those reverend gentlemen, viz. they have 
but too well copied, and imbibed the sentiments of their 
great j)rototype, the address of the thirty-four — in page 
4, we are informed that "They (the people) have been 
carefully kept in ignorance of the progress of measures, 
until the purposes of administration were consummated, 
and the fate of the country sealed.'* It is natural here 
to understand that the purposes of administration were , 



Si 

consummated, when war was declared ; and that by this 
also, "the fate of the country sealed." The people be- 
ing carefully kept m this ignorance, seems to be that 
which rendered the declaration of war so totally unex- 
pected to those reverend gentlemen. 

Hkre then, we may do well, to see what evidence 
may be collected from the words of the addressers, that 
there was some important thing in the "progress of 
measures," which was "carefully" concealed trom the 
knowledge of the people, which they ought to have 
known. They say, immediately preceding this declara- 
tion, "Except the message of the President of the Uni- 
ted States, which is now before the public, nothing con- 
fidential tv as communicated.^'' No important thing, then, 
in the President's communication, could be hidden from 
the people. They proceed, "That message contained 
no fact, not previously known^ The people know a// 
then, as yet. "The intention to wage war and invade 
Canada had been long since openly avowed. The ob- 
ject of hostile menace had been ostentatiously announc- 
ed." So far, so good. It was not hidden then, from 
the people, that Congress intended to go to war ; this 
was right in them, not carefully to keep the people in ig- 
norance of their intention. I think it was somewhere 
about the last of November, and the begmning of De- 
cember, 1811, that Congress, to relieve the people of 
their suspence, let them know that they were deter- 
mined to go to war with England, before they should 
rise, if England did not before then relax in her meas- 
ures towards us. Congress gave time to England, and 
to their own constituents, to consider of the war, and 
they did so, and expressed their approbation. Many of 
the General Courts, of different States, pledged their 
Sacred honors, that they would support Congress in 
what measures their wisdom might dictate for our re- 
lief ; and that Canada would be an object of attention, 
w^as "ostentatiously announced." So that, not only 
thezutzr, but the very object of the war, was pointed out 
to the people ; nothing was hidden from them, and every 
important measure of that long session did but corrobor- 
ate the intention of Congress for war, by being prcpar- 



52 

atory to it. The addressers proceed, " The inadr- 
quacy of botli our army and navy for successful invasion, 
and the insufficiency of the fortifications for the security 
of the seaboard, were, every where, known." Well, 
surely, this was ample knowledge. The people have 
nothing to complain of yet. What next follows ? Why, 
"Yet the doors of Congress were shut upon the people." 
"They have been carefully kept i^novdnt of the progress 
of measures until the purposes of administration were 
consummated, and the fate of the country sealed." 
This is the greatest wonder of all ! What did the shut- 
ting of the doors of Congress hide from the people, when 
nothing remained but to call the important question 
upon the subject of war, after it had been debated in 
Congress six months with open doors ? and nothing 
new brought forward, and the people perfectly under- 
standing the matter in all its circumstances, from the 
beginning to the end ; the intent of war, of invading 
Canada, the weakness of our seaboard and maritime 
defence ? They saw all our preparations for war, and 
expected a declaration of it in the close of the session, 
and it came according to their wish and expectation. It 
still remains to be known, what important thing or cir- 
cumstance occurred in the measures, which the people 
"have been carefully kept ignorant of," and that too, 
when all things were as the people would have them. 
The address, in making declaration that the people were 
so early and well informed in every thing, does not prove 
that they were ignorant of any thing. What therefore 
can that thing possibly be ? The addressers acknowledge, 
"nothing confidential was communicated !" We may then 
from all circumstances justly conclude it was nothing ! 
Here then the matter comes out. The thirty-four ad- 
dressers have told their constituents, that the people 
"have been carefully ktpt in ignorance" of a great and 
important nothing, to the endangerment of their liber- 
ties ! The odium of such conduct toward the people 
rests upon Congress ! No pains are spared to invent 
pretexts, by misrepresentation, for the purpose of vihfy- 
ing and defaming our rulers, and no bounds set to 







q 



slander, when once the pretexts are found, eltlicr by rv?-* 
liglon, or a sense of moral obhgation ; no bound set to it 
by a love of truth ; modesty and common decency have 
been no bar in the way of it. Indeed, it has been carried 
to the utmost stretch of obscenity ! No time or pkice too 
sacred for defaming Christian rulers of a Christian 
people ! Slander has sacrilegiously robbed the desk of 
appropriate truths; and w^orshipping assemblies of God's 
people of tlieir devotion. Our best men sre publicly 
represented as being "dark-minded, cool, deliberate 
wicked rulers," as doing that at which "demons might 
blush," and then, "conscious of their guilt and danger, 
but destitute as fallen angels of any heart to repent," 
in a "fit of desperation^'''' have flung our country into all 
the horrors of war. How much, reverend gentlemen, 
we stand in needof a power and government over our own 
f,pirits, that we may with decorum answer such astonish- 
ing language as this ! Give me liberty to say, gentlemen, 
that some of you treat our Christian rulers with more 
freedom than what Michael thought decent, or even 
f/rtreJ to treat the devil, Jude ix. — "Yet Michael the 
archangel, when contending with the devil, he disputed 
about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a 
railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee." 
Holy angels have always been afraid to call hard names 
and bring railing accusations. Peter tells us of it as 
well as jfude, in his 2 Epistle, 2nd chap. 11 verse — 
"Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, 
bring not railing accusation against them before the 
Lord." Those characters were very wicked, and \vould 
have justified the angels in bringing a railing accusation 
against them, if any would. They are described in the 
10th verse thus, "But chiefly them that walk after the 
flesh in the lusts of uncleanness, and despise government: 
presumptuous are they, self-willed, they are not «/ra?£/ to 
speak evil of digjiities.'* We never can have worse 
characters on the earth, than these ; and you know what 
dreadful degrees of hardness, in wickedness, sinners 
arrive to, before they shall ";20f be afraid to despise gov- 
ernment and speak evil of dignities.'^ But even such 



54 

#iid the devil himself, received no railing accusation from 
the angels. They were afraid to give it, they considered 
that no character or circumstance would justify it. 

In connexion with the defamation of our rulers, at 
this crisis, there is a wonderful propensity in the federal 
writers to extol England and decry France. It is well 
to talk of our neighbors, where we have nothing but that 
which is good to say of them, and present them as suit- 
able examples for imitation ; but to be gabbling over 
their real faults without necessity, is justly esteemed 
slander. What necessity now presents so loudly calling for 
the faults and wickedness of the French nation and their 
emperor to be published abroad ? True, France has 
injured us, and so has England. For England there is 
some palliation made on the account of the nature and 
character of the war. See Dr. Osgood's Protest, page 
10 — when speaking of the complaints our government 
make against England, he says, "They pretend that in 
a war of almost twenty years duration, and of a nature 
and character different from any other that has ever hap- 
pened in modern times, some of our seamen have been 
pressed on board British ships," &c. Has not the war 
continued as long with France, as with England, which 
has all this time been at w?r with her ? And do not the 
two belligerents reciprocate the 'nature and character' of 
the same war ? Will not, therefore reason and candor 
make equal allowance on both sides ? France has in- 
jured us, and we have taken notice of it. She has relin- 
quished the measures of complaint, and a negotiation is 
now pending between her and our government respect- . 
ing reparation for the injuries we have received. Where 
is the policy, therefore, at this time, in throwing out 
so many hard and illiberal things against her and her 
emperor ? Dr. Osgood, in page 13, speaking of our 
government, oljserves, "They have acknowledged them- 
selves caught and entangled in the toils of Bonaparte, 
that rival of Satan himself in guile and mischief, and his 
most conspicuous agent here on earth." Mr. Thayer 
coincides with this language, page 11 — "Great Britain, 
which alone prevents the scourge of nations from having; 



55 

iiiiversal sway, have we not everything to fear"-^"vvc 
have borne the insolence, the admonitions, the threats of 
this ILLUSTRIOUS SINNER." And the Rev. Mr. Lau- 
rence seems to be not a whit behind his fellows in high 
sounding invectives, see page 12 — "What we most se- 
riously dread, is an alliance with the tyrant of France, 
from whose sceptre springs certain wretchedness, and 
whose very touch is death to republican independence. 
I warn you, citizens, to beware of a connexion more 
deadly than the adder's bite,, or the serpent's sting, that 
you may avoid this scourge of the human race, whose 
lawless ambition would co\er a globe with wretched- 
ness and misery.'* Dr. Morse also cannot pass beyond 
his 23d page before he vents his spleen and pours out 
his gall upon the French emperor — "and to throw us 
into the ^/?^?f^/ embraces of the tyrant of Europe, the in- 
satiable devourer of every republic on earth, except our 
own." And Mr. Channing appears to be more full in 
expressing his sensibility of the great wickedness and 
atrocity of the French government, page 13, thus, " I 
blush — I mourn. On this point no language can be ex- 
aggerated. We are linking ourselves with the ackno^vl- 
eidged enemy of mankind — with a government, whicli 
' can be bound by no promises — no oaths — no plighted 
faith — which prepares the way for her armies by perfi- 
dy, bribery, corruption — which pillages \^ith equal ra- 
pacity its enemies and allies — which has left not a ves- 
tige of liberty where it has extended its blasting sway." 
And to cap the climax of impolitic folly, even his ex- 
cellency Governor Strong, in his message to the General 
Court of this Commonwealth, of January 27, 1813, 
must clap to a helping hand, and say, '* Although we 
have no agency in conducting our national affairs, we 
must view with anxious concern, the important changes, 
which are taking place among the powers of Europe. 
One of its sovereigns, under pretence of giving freedom 
to the seas, is carrying war and desolation iiito regions 
remote from each other, and seems determined hj fraud 
and violence to subjugate or destroy every civilized na- 
tion.'* Why at this time is there this uniforia high ton- 



56 

ed flow of Invectives against France ? Has she not relax- 
ed in measures of which we justly complained ? Arc 
there not some glimmerings of hope that she will do lis 
justice, or something near right ? What object can those 
gentlemen have in view, by thus decrying France at this 
time ? To say they act without object, is to say they 
act irrationally ; that they are moved by mechanism 
alone. This cannot be admitted. Is it possible they 
should be afraid that our government are about to form 
a treaty offensive and defensive witli France ? This can- 
not, at present, be the case. There is not the remotest 
hint of any such purpose. The President in his mes- 
sage to Congress of June 18, 1812, when contemplating 
the measure of war, which the United States were about 
to take, expressly says, "Opposing force to force in de- 
fence of their natural rights, shall commit a just cause 
into the hands of the Almighty Disposer of events, 
avoiding all connexions ivhich might entangle it in the 
contests or views of other powers.'''' This has eVer 
been the uniform sentiment and feelings of our govern- 
ment, in accordance to the advice of the illustrious Wash- 
ington ; and we have never heard the faintest whisptr 
from any part of the Union to the contrary. This, there- 
fore, cannot be that which the federal writers so greatly 
fear and deprecate. What then can it be, but the favor- 
able termination of the pending negotiation with France ? 
This must be that, no doubt, which so deeply penetrates 
their sensibility. Not a treaty of alliance, of which there 
is nothing said in its favor ; but one of amity, com- 
merce and navigation. This can be the only probable 
thing which appears so dreadful to them. The Rev. 
Mr. Laurence expresses himself thus in page 12 — " It 
is hot British vengeance displayed in revoked orders in 
council ; neither is it the bloody assassin which most 
excites our fears ; Vv^hat we most seriously dread is an 
alliance with the tyrant of France.^'' Dr. Morse express- 
es himself more fully to the point, page 24, thus, "What 
then are we to expect from the contest in which we are 
engaged, but the ruin of our commerce, the depreciation 
and abandonment of estates, now among the most valu- 



57 

abl?, in our commercial towns, tlie sacrifice of an im- 
mense property of our citizens, which is now in foreign 
countries beyond our control, or on tiie ocean ; the loss 
of our little navy and brave seamen, the destruction of 
the lives of multitudes of our young m.en ; avast in- 
crease of national debt, and heavy taxes, without means 
of paving them ; disunion, alienation, animosities, insur- 
rections, and civil war among ourselves, and^ luorst of 
all, an alliance vriTii France, an evil to be serious- 
ly apprehended, and more to be deprecated than an}' my 
imagination can conceive, the evils of which, if we are to 
judge from the state of European republics, compre- 
hended in her embraces, no one can contemplate with- 
out horror and dismay." Oxvonderful! won derful 1 ! 
when nothing at present can be "seriously apprehend- 
ed'* more than an amicable adjustment of differences 
with France, even if that should take place ! Would 
this be such an unutterable evil ? This is more to be 
feared than "the bloody assassin!" More than a "civil 
war among ourselves," yea, beyond v>4iat "imagination 
can conceive !" This caps the climax of federal horrors, 
and leaves the ten furies unnoticed in the back ground 1 
This fear draws forth and pours out the full tide of fed- 
eral invective upon the government of France. Is the 
design of it, if possible, so to irritate that government, 
as to prevent them doing us justice ? What else can it 
be ? Minor scribblers are not so much regarded ; but 
when the Governor of Massachusetts lends them his 
strength, what will the effect of it be ? Official commu- 
nications from the President to Congress, and from the 
Governors to the General Courts of the States, are found 
among our articles of exportation. They are of light 
carriage, find a quick market in Europe, and are looked 
at with eagerness on every royal exchange. What apol- 
ogy can Mr. Barlow make for all this gross abuse of the 
French government, if he should find it to be an}^ obsta- 
cle in the way of his adjusting our differences with them ? 
Will it satisfy them for him to tell them that the liberty 
of the press is a sacred principle in the constitutions of 
our governments — that England has her friends in the 
United States, and early laid a foundation for this, bv 

8 



58 

providing for the return of the torie^ to dwell aivion^- 
them, "as the most fit instruments whereby to work 
their ruin" — that these persons have extended their in- 
fluence — that they and their party can never be rec-oji- 
ciled to republican forms of government, nor to the free- 
dom of the press, but by it mean to destroy both — that 
this party retains a deep rooted enmity against France for 
assisting America in her obtaining Jier independence ; 
and as Britain and her friends have the full and unre- 
strained liberty of the press, they make liberal use of it 
to breathe out their unfriendly feelings towards France. 
Will it pacify the government of France, if Mr. Barlow 
should tell them that these invectives are the productions 
of unprincii^led persons, who call their tongues their 
own, and could never be persuaded of the evil of that 
little member, that it "is a fire, a world of iniquity, that 
it defileth the whole body, and selteth on fire the course 
of nature, and it is set on fire of hell ;" and that the 
tongue proves itself to be an unruly evil, full of deadly 
poison, which knows no difference between legitimate 
and illegitimate liberty ; and that this intrepid band of 
slanderers in the United States do not treat the govern- 
ment of France with m.ore virulence than their own ; 
that they are marshalled by a British spirit, which places 
them in battle array, and with their heaviest artillery dis- 
gorge their foulest gkit in their fullest vollies upon their 
own government ? And if in this connexion they should 
ask ]NIr. Barlow whether it were best for governments to 
admit the liberty of speech and of the press ? Would he 
not blush, and mourn, and sigh, and be silent? 

Thj: next thing in order, after defaming our rulers, 
to excite the passions of the people against the war, is 
to dwell upon the unhappy circumstances which attend 
it. In this the morality of the war takes the lead. It is 
said to be unjust, and murderous, and therefore unsuit- 
able to pray for its success. It is conceived that what 
has already been said of the conduct and pretensions of 
Britain towards us, sufficiently confirm not only its jus- 
tice, but necessity. But as I think the observations 
pertinent, I will quote the sentiments of his excellency 
Governor Plumer of New-Hampshire, in his kite address 



59 

to the General Court of that state. "The justice anc^ 
necessity of this war are much greater than most of the 
wavs ancient or modern, that are recorded in history, sa- 
cred or civil. A single case from each will confirm and 
illustrate this position. In ancient times certain Jews 
insulted and abused a concubme, so that she died. The 
men of Benjamin refused to give up the culprits, and 
for this offence the other tribes made war on them ; more 
tlmn one hundred thousand persons were slain, and one 
of their tribes nearly exterminated : and w^e have the 
sure word of testimony^ that God approved of that war. 
In modern times England waged war in support of her 
claim to cut logwood in the Bay of Campeachy, and to 
gather salt in the island of Tortuga§. ; and in the reign of 
her present king, she made war against Spain, because 
the Spanish court refused to let her see a treaty it had 
made with France, to which England was not a party, 
and a sio-ht of which she had no riacht to demand. If 
God justified and supported the war of Israel to avenge 
the death of a single woman, will not this unchangeable 
justice, and this invincible power succeed a war, not of 
our own seeking, but forced upon us by the tyranny and 
injustice of our enemies, a war in defence of our rights, 
a war to avenge the murder of our citizens, the impris- 
onment, slavery and death of thousands of our seamen ! 
Is not tlie agency of the Almighty, in the nature and 
fitness of things, employed in promoting the cause of 
truth and justice, and in supporting and vindicating the 
equal rights he has himself established ! Our cause is 
just, and if the American people, as a band of brothers, 
unite and act with the firmness and resolution of free- 
men, our success vv^ill be certain. In fine, the just rea- 
sons for our going to war with England, are so super- 
abundant, and the necessity so imperiously calling for it, 
that federal gentlemen are constrained to acknowledge an 
occasion of war on our part, although they so roundly 
deny it ! See the Address, page 6, "It appears to the 
undersigned, that the wrongs of which the United States 
have to complain, although in some aspects very griev- 
ous to our interests., and, in many humiliating to our 
pride, were vet r.f a nature, which, in the present state 




65 

of the world, either would not justify war, or which war 
would not remedy." Here the just cause of war is 
granted, the policy of pursuing it is doubted, from the 
circumstance of "the present state of the world," or 
from the inefficacy of the measure. Page 8, '■''Yet wi- 
doubtedly grievous injuries have resulted to the seamen 
of the United States." "But the question is, can war 
be proper for such cause, before all liope of reasonable 
accommodation has failed ? Even after extinguishment 
of such hope, can it be proper, until our own practice be 
so regulated as to remove, in such foreign nation, any 
reasonable apprehension of injury ?" Here it is implied 
that the '"'' grievous injuries'*'' are a just cause of war. 
But the propriety of going to war on the account of 
them, depends on the solution of the two questions above 
stated. In page 13, the addressers express themselves 
more to the point, thus — "Certainly, the British orders 
in council and the French decrees form a system subver- 
sive of neutral rights, and constitute just grounds of 
complaint,^'' But here again the addressers endeavour 
to wipe off the propriety of going to war with England, 
as the adulterous woman her crime from her mouth, and 
with as little effect, Prov. xxx. 20 — "She eateth and 
wipeth her mouth, and saith, I have done no wicked- 
ness." They proceed — "Yet viewed relatively to the 
condition of those powers towards each other, and of the 
United States towards both, the undersigned cannot per- 
suade themselves that the orders in council, as they now 
exist, and with their present eifect and operation, justify 
the selection of Great Britain as our enemy, and render 
necessary a declaration of unqualified war." If "cer- 
tainly the British orders in council and French decrees 
form a system subversive of neutral rights, and constitute 
just grounds of complainf against both; and France 
has relinquished her part of this obnoxious system, and 
England still adheres to it with great rigour, how does 
this conduct in France remove our just complaints from 
England ? The addressers, however, do not say, in so 
many words, that our just grounds of complaint are 
removed from England ; but only, that they cannot 
persuade themselves that this circumstance, leaving in 



61 

operation the orders in council against us, "justify the 
selection of Great Britain as our enemy." The reasons 
the addressers render for this their inability, are worthy 
of particular attention. The first is drawn from its 
"being viewed relatively to the condition of those powers 
towards each other." But what circumstance is there 
in the relative condition between England and France, 
from which an argument is drawn against the justice of 
selecting the former as our enemy ? The addressers 
have not been so kind as to suggest. May we conjec- 
ture it is because the own mother's son is the more liable 
to be slain and divided by the sword ? This would be 
to "quit our own to stand on foreign ground." The 
second ara:ument is drawn from a view of the relative 
condition of the United States towards both." But 
what is there here to prevent our selecting England as 
our enemy ? The addressers still keep us ignorant. 
Perhaps it is because we claim a more general descent 
from England than from France. This argument is ad- 
dressed to our sympathy. What else can it be ? The 
third argument is drawn from the present existence, 
operation and effect of the orders in cpuncil. "The 
undersigners cannot persuade themselves that the orders 
in council, as they now exist, and with their present effect 
and operation, justify the selection of Great Britain as 
our enemy." Here is something which looks more like 
an argument than any thing I have before seen. Their 
words imply that, the orders in council were once a jus- 
tifiable ground for the selection of Great Britain for our 
enemy ; but that they had received some alteration, or 
modification, which had removed their obnoxious qual- 
ity — thus, "the undersigned cannot persuade themselves 
that the orders in council as they 7Joxu exist, and with 
their present effect and operation,*' &c. I have never 
before heard of this favorable modification of the orders 
in council ; that jioiv they are more favorable than what 
they \A-ere, and that their preseiit effect and operation are 
not as they were in past time. I admire that I have not 
some where before now, seen a hint of this new modifi- 
cation — either in some communication to Congress, or 
in some of their debates, or in some newspaper, or have 



65 

heard somebody speak of it before now. Surely those 
gentlemen cannot have reference to any repeal or suppo- 
sed repeal of those orders, for the mode of their ex- 
pressions forbids this, for they say, 'as they noxu exist, 
and with their /^re^e/?? (f^cif and operation.'' This sup- 
poses their ''existence, ejfect and ofieration.'' The gen- 
tlemen have not deigned to point out the new alteration, 
or modification those orders in council have under- 
gone, so therefore we are left to our full liberty to con- 
jecture what it is. Perhaps it is, that his s Britannic 
Majesty has reduced his duties or customs on our goods, 
so that we should pay but a very trifling tribute to him ; 
as the orders in council, contained a provision in them- 
selves for his Majesty to make any future alterations in 
those duties as he in his wisdom might dictate. It is to 
be remembered, that we contend against the principle, 
and not the sum, as our fathers did against a light tax 
upon tea. But after all, the gentlemen addressers do 
not say, in so many w'ords, that there is any favorable 
alteration or modification of those orders in council ; 
this is only an inference naturally drawn by the reader, 
as implied, in their argument, and if it should prove 
fallacious, and no such modification existed, they have 
in this argument shown as much benevolence, as in a 
number of other instances, to their constituents, as they 
would have done, if they had thrown an handful of ashes 
in their eyes, so that they should not have seen again 
for a fortnight. But in the 14th page, the addressers 
not only come more, but most to the point, in frankly 
declaring, that we have abundant and just ground, on 
our part, for going to war, thus — "The right of retalia- 
tion, as existinsf in either beilia:erent, it was imtossihle 
for the United States, consistent either with their duty 
or interest, to admit." Kow is it possible that words 
should express the justice and necessity of our going to 
Avar, in stronp^er terms than these ? If "it were impossi- 
ble for the United States, consistent either with their 
diit'i or inte?'est, to admit the richt of retaliation as ex- 
isting in either belligerent," then certainly both duty and 
iutere^it called on the United States to make resistance to 
the pretensions of both the belligerents. But as one of 



63 

the belligerents lias relinquished his riglit of retaliation, 
as respects the United States, and the other still adheres 
to those retaliatory pretensions, the duty and interest of 
the United States call on them to make resistance, and 
not admit them, as our accjuiescence would imply. Our 
interest may justly call upon us to draw the sword in de- 
fence of it. But tlien we are left at our own discretion 
whether ^ve will do it or not. We often do things which 
•are not for our interest, and in many instances have a 
rip-ht so to do. We mav spend portions of our interest 
and be innocent, for our comfort, convenience or pleas- 
ure. But, according to the address, we have something 
more than interest calling upon us to make resistance — 
they combine the voice of clutt/ with that of interest. 
"The right of retaliation, as existing in either belliger- 
ent, it was impossible for the United States, consistent 
with either their duty or interest, to admit." If we 
may dispense with our interest in certain cases, and be 
innocent, surely we cannot with duti/. Here then the 
good morality and imperious necessity of the declaration 
of the war, and carrying it on with vigor is, if the ad- 
dressers do not err, established beyond controversy ; and 
with this view of the war, it is astonishing that they did 
not vote for it ! For in this instance, in declaring our 
just grounds for war, they have not attempted, as in 
the preceding ones, to wipe off the good policy of going 
to war, and burn and pulverise it, and cast it into the 
brook Kidron as an unholy thing. And it is still more 
surprising what should induce them to make this de- 
claration of the necessity of the war, except they were 
impelled to it by some extra power, as was Balaam to 
speak the truth in spite of all his opposition to it. There 
is something omnipotent in tnith, it will cause itself to 
be owned and respected. 

Another objection against the war, is drawn from a 
comparison of our maritime strength with that of our 
enemv. This the addressers brins; into view in their 
13th and 14th pages, when speaking of England and 
France, they sa)', "Both attempt to justify their encroach- 
ment on the gcr.cral law of nations, by the plea of 
retiliatiou. In the relative position and proportion of 



6^ 

strength of the United States to either beiilgcrent, there 
appeared httle probabiUty that mc could compel the 
one or the other, by hostile operation, to abandon this 
plea." Mr. Channing speaks more largely of the pov/er 
of Britain over us, in illustrating the great impropriety 
of the war, in page 10th, when speaking of the 
ocean he says, "We see it laving all our shores— we 
hear the noise of its waves — but it is our clement no 
longer," and in pages 14, 15, he asks these important 
questions, and makes his observations on them: — "What 
brilliant successes are placed within our reach ? Is it 
on the ocean or on the land that we are to meet and spoil 
our foe ? The ocean we resign to England ; and unless 
her policy or clemency prevent, we must resign to her 
our cities also. She can subject them to tribute or re- 
duce them to ashes.*' Here Mr. Channing ought to 
have remembered, that Britain has already, in her orders 
of council, not only laid our cities under a very heavy 
tribute, but our country also ; this is one reason of the 
present war. We wish not to be taxed at the will and 
pleasure of his Britannic Majesty nov/, any more than 
our fathers did in 1774 — the tax which he required of 
our fathers at that time, was nothing to be compared 
with what he requires of us, in his orders in council, 
upon the pains and penalties of the confiscation of our 
vessels and cargoes. The circuituous routs, to touch 
at one of his ports, the expense of unloading and loading 
up again, paying duties, buying his licence, in our out 
and home bound trade to Europe, if it falls short, will 
come near ten per cent, on our extra produce — see 10th 
page of this address. This would of itself be quite a 
handsome colonial revenue for his Britannic Majesty, or 
we might expect it would be very soon, inasmuch as 
the duties on our goods are to be augmented or dimin- 
ished as his Majesty in his wisdom may dictate. Is it 
suitable that we should submit to this tribute, merely 
because England has more cannon than we have ? This 
would be making short work of it, and we had better 
yield at once, and our fathers had better never have set - 
us the example of resisting downright tyranny. And it 
seems that ISIr. Channing has already come forward with 



6^ 

his example, by saying, "The ocean we resign to Eng- 
land." This seems to be a pleasing circumstance with 
federalists, manifest repeatedly in their convivial and so- 
cial meetings. That litde ditty, "Britannia rule the 
seas," sounds as agreeably in federal ears, as Ezekiel's 
words did in those of his hearers when he was "unto 
them as a very lovely song of one that hath a pleasant 
voice." However, the United States do not yield their 
rights so tamely and become slaves ; and it is expected 
thev never will, till they become a nation of Quakers. 
They contend for their right of the ocean, not that part 
merely "laving all our shores,'* but also the majestic 
billows which roll in the broad and "narrow seas." Ar- 
guments dr:nvn from our weakness are appropriate to 
cowards, tories and traitors ; but this was never the pol- 
icy of Washington. In his stratagems in two instances 
he made his enemy believe him much stronger than he 
was ; and in one his own army. The history of the 
American revolution mentions both circumstances. 
Those now who^are ready to proclaim abroad our weak- 
ness, show themselves not to be friends to our country 
or its cause. 

In various instances the opposers of the present war 
address the sympathetic feelings and religious affections 
of the people. The war is against the nation from which 
wc descended ; against the country which contains the 
sepulchres and ashes of our fathers. So, may we say, 
do some of the mountains of Ararat where the ark rest- 
ed. But is this a good reason why we should yield to 
oppression ? Was this an argument of weight in the 
year 1775, when urged by the tories of that day ? If it 
be ^vrong in us to resist the tyrannical pretensions of 
England towards us, because she is of near akin to us, is 
it not wrong in her, to make those pretensions ; for it is 
manifest that we stand in as near a relation to her as she 
docs to us ? Dr. Morse with others, to illustrate the 
great «>vickedness of the present war, presents to view 
the religious cliaracter of the nation with which we con- 
tend ; he observes, "A war, it is added in the procla- 
mation, against a nation, Svhich for many generations 
has been the bulwark of the religion we profess.* " To 
9 



66 

this I would only observe, can our fathers bear testimo- 
ny to this declaration, who, though now dead, yet by 
their history, speak ? They tell of their sufferings by 
their being persecuted in England on the account of 
their religion ; and finally were induced for the sake of 
a good conscience, and the free exercise of their rehgion, 
to leave dear friends, and all the delights of a civihzed, 
cultivated word, pass the dangers of the seas, and settle 
in this part of the earth, then a dreary wilderness, and 
with none but savage neighbors ! Do our persecuted 
lathers say that England was the bulwark of their reli- 
gion ? And do not we profess the same religion our fath- 
ers did ? And England has not changed hers from that 
time to this. The Doctor proceeds, "Yes, let me add, 
against a nation which is still the bulwark of this reli- 
gion — a nation which imbosoms a great multitude of 
devout men and women, — whose prayers, like a cloud of 
incense, daily ascends up before the throne of God for 
protection." It is hoped, it is believed there is this 
multitude of pious, prayerful persons in England ; for 
if they had been as destitute of them as was Sodom, we 
might have expected before now, some awful, some 
dreadful tokens of the divine displeasure to be executed 
on them for their national sins ; lor it is believed, that 
there is not a more faithless and wicked ministry in any 
nation of the earth. And in addition to this, in the fed- 
eral n ritings against the vi^ar, the religious affections and 
consciences of our fellow citizens are addressed, on the 
ground of the war being unjust, wicked and murderous ; 
that those who lend their aid in personal services, or 
loan their money for its support, or countenance it in 
writing, or conversation, are guilty of blood, and are 
considered in the view of God, and the divine law, as 
murderers I Dr. Osgood appears to be the fullest on 
this point, and will of course receive particular attention. 
In page 9th of his protest he observes, "If at the com- 
mand of weak or wicked rulers, they undertake an un- 
just war, each man who volunteers his service in such a 
cause, or loans his money for its support, or by his con- 
versation, his writings, or any other mode ot influence, 
encourages its prosecution, that man is an accomplice in 



the wickedness, loads his conscience with the blackest 
crimes, brings the guilt of blood upon his soul, and, in 
the sight of God and his law, is a murderer." — 
"Whether to obey God or man, is the question upon 
which we are to make up oiu' minds ; in this i^wful dilem- 
ma^ my brethren, you and I, all the men and all the 
WOMEN in these United States, are now placed." "Each 
individual, after consulting his conscience, and avaihng 
himself of all the information within his reach, must de- 
termine for himself, and according to his own ideas of 
responsibility to God, at whose tribunal he must give 
an account. Nor has he much time for deliberation.''^ 
Here has the Doctor imposed a hard task upon the peo- 
ple of his charge, and upon the public in general ; if 
they have governed themselves according to his preach- 
ing, for seventeen years past. When the people assem- 
bled in legal town-meetings, to consult upon the pro- 
priety or expediency of adopting Jay's treaty, the 
Doctor says of them, in his sermon of Nov. 19, 1795, 
pages 30, 3 1, thus — "The infatuated multitude have acted 
as blindly in this business, as those objects which are 
moved by mechanism only. Nine-tenths of the people 
at those meetings know but little more of the relations 
of their country to other countries, than they do of the 
relations of this earth to the heavenly bodies. Their 
ignorance, however, upon such subjects may not be to 
their reproach. They may know enough for the places 
and stations which Providence hath assigned them ; and 
may be good and worthy members of the community, 
provided they would be content to move in their own 
sphere, and not meddle with things too high for them." 
"Not being the eyes, ears or tongues of the body, they 
are monstrously disorderly when they presume to exer- 
cise the office of these organs." "And their presump- 
tion is of the most dangerous tendency." — Thus it ap- 
pears that the Doctor, but a few years ago, considered 
that nine-tenths of the people in their meetings knew 
but little more of the relation of their country to other 
countries, than they did of the relation of this earth to 
the heavenly bodies. This however was not to their re- 
proach, they knew enough for the places and stations 



68 ♦ 

which Providence had assigned them ; and in these places 
• might be good members of society, provided they 
should not meddle with things too high for them, by 
looking into our public affairs, for they not being the 
*'eyes, ears or tongue of the body" politic, "they are 
monstrously disorderly when they presume to exercise 
the office of these organs.'* — But what now does the 
Doctor require ? Why, all must be expert in the bu- 
siness, and have suddenly to learn their political astron- 
omy, and find out the relation of this country with oth- 
ers, to determine the justice of the present war, that 
they may know how to act, so as not to be guilty of 
blood. But those who have attended to the Doctor's 
preaching, and have not looked into public affairs, what 
a miserable situation they are in, to determine upon the 
propriety of the war ! What a pity it is, that the Doc- 
tor did not encourage his hearers and the public, seven- 
teen years ago. to acquire knowledge in their political 
astronomy, that they might now be enabled to decide 
upon the question, that they might act with propriety, 
and not be considered as murderers ! There are, accor- 
ding to Mr. Channing, these important questions to be 
answered before the character of the war can be decided 
on. Page 8, he says, "To render a war justifiable, it is 
not enough that we have received injuries — we must ask 
ourselves, have we done our duty to the nation of which 
we complain ? Have we taken and kept a strict and 
impartial positioji towards her and her enemy ? Have 
we not submitted to outrages from her enemy by which 
be has acquired advjuitages in the war ? Have we 
sought reparation of injuries in a truly pacific spirit — 
have we insisted only on undoubted rights ? Have we 
demanded no unreasonable concessions ? These ques- 
tions must be answered before we decide on the char- 
acter of the war." These questions must be determined 
by each individual, accoiding to Dr. Osgood — "All the 
men and all the women in these United States,'* each 
one must decide for himself ; "nor has he much time 
for deliberation,'* says the Doctor. This is requiring 
them to make bricks w ithout straw ! It must be a hard 
tafek for those gentlemen, who have not been in a habit 



• 69 

of looking at public affairs, and more especially for_ the 
ladies, who Ivave not considered politics as coming within 
their sphere of action ; it is a hard case if they are to 
be considered as murderers, although our government 
may have wrongfully gone to war, because they have 
in their sphere "aided and assisted their husbands and 
sons in carrying it on. It is really thought that the 
Doctor would do well to absolve the ladies from his 
anathema, if they have, in subjection to their own hus- 
bands, made a shirt or two for the soldiers. And if the 
young ladies, in Stoneham and Reading, did, as has 
been reported of them, in a glow of patriotism present a 
stand of colours to a volunteer Rifle Company of young 
gentlemen, composed of these towns, in approbation of 
their forwardness to defend the rights of their country, 
it is thought they may pass without being guilty of a 
great crime. And if the young ladies m Pittsfield did 
serve the soldiers there with a sumptuous dinner, with 
the consent of their parents, in token of their good wishes 
for the warriors and their success ; and if they be now, 
in the north part of New-York and Vermont, preparing 
thousands of socks and mittens for the soldiers at this 
inclement season of the year, among whom are their 
fathers and brothers, it is thought they may be excused, 
and that the Doctor will feel himself under high obliga- 
tions to remove from those litde innocents, his imputa- 
tions of murder and blood- guiltiness ! 

The next circumstance which will be taken notice 
of, and which is found in federal writings, and as an 
argument against the present war, and which attacl^s no 
ordinary guilt to our rulers, is the kind of blood to be 
shed in it, and the valuable lives to-be lost in the conflict 
beyond those vA\o fall in European wars. Mr. Chan- 
ning speaking of the war, observes, page 15, "It will 
cost us blood, and not the blood of men whose lives are 
of litde worth, of men burdensome to society, such as 
often compose the armies of Europe." "In this part of 
our country, at least, we have no mobs, no overflowing 
population from which we wish to be relieved by war. 
We must send o\xv sons, our brothers to the field ; men 
who have property, homes, affectionate friends, and the 



prospect of useful and happy lives. That government 
will contract no ordinary guilt which sheds such blood 
for provinces." Here Mr. Channing conveys new ideas 
to me of European armies and of the object of their 
wars. I have quoted the passage thus far entire, to re- 
move all suspicion of misrepresentation, though I shall 
be under necessity, for the sake of perspicuity, to repeat 
the most of it. The war, says Mr. Channing, "will 
cost us blood, and not the blood of men whose lives are 
of little worth — of men burdensome to society, such as 
often compose the armies of Europe — we have no over- 
flowing population, from which we wish to be relieved 
by war.'''' This places the wars of Europe on different 
ground from v/hat I ever imagined. It v/ould seem that 
slaughter and defeat of their own army were their object 
to be relieved "from their overflowing population.*' 
The end for which the conflicting powers in their wars, 
will naturally "often" pray, is the destruction of their 
own army. This explains a declaration often found in 
federal sermons and writings to this purport, that 
"England has successfully resisted the strides of the 
tyrant of Europe." It has never been understood before 
how England has done this ; but now, it appears that 
her success has consisted in the defeat and destruction of 
her armies, whereby she is "relieved from her overflow- 
ing population," and "of men burdensome to society." 
But after all, I have my difficulties in admitting Mr. 
Channing's difference between European armies, and 
ours, as to relationship, which must be obviated before 
I can concede to it. This is the difference which he 
makes, "We must send our sons, our brothers to 
the field." I have always understood that family con- 
nexions were the same in all nations, those in Europe 
the same as in Asia, Africa and America ; that, "all 
the charities of father, son and brother," were common 
to mankind ; and how crowned heads in Europe should 
"often" raise armies of men, and they not be sons of 
MOTHERS, is a mystery to me ! And that our gover.. 
ment, "will contract no ordinary guilt which sheds such 
blood," as sons and brothers, in the present war, is in- 
comprehensible ! However, we must view this as being 



■ 7i 

the fate of America iii all the wars which shall be forced 
Upon her. It was the case with us, in our revolutionary- 
contest with England ; so that we ought not to impute 
more iniquity to our present Congress for sending "our 
sons and brothers into the field" now, than to all the 
Congresses throughout the eight years conflict we had 
with England for our liberties ; for they looked for no 
others to send into the field, but sons and brothers, ex- 
cept some might think there was an addition, when a 
father and grand- father were sent, who they themselves 
were sons and brothers. 

The last great and weighty objection which I shall 
take notice of, used by the writers against the war, is 
the divided state of the people with respect to it. And 
some of them even call upon the people to make resist- 
ance. The addressers in pages 5 and 6, speaking of 
our government, observe thus, "Of all states, that of war 
is most likely to call into activity the passions, which 
are hostile and dangerous to such a form of government. 
Time is yet important to Dur country to settle and mature 
its recent institutions. Above all, it appeared to the 
undersigned, from signs not to be mistaken, that if we 
entered upon this war, we did it as a divided people ; not 
only from a sense of the inadequacy of the means to 
success, but from moral and political objections of great 
weight and very general influence.*' Here, it is true, 
the addressers do not call upon the people to make resis- 
tance to the war, as some of their pupils do ; but they 
well exhibit the part of the wood- cutter in the fable, to 
whom the chased fox came, and with his assistance hid 
himself, with his promise that he would not tell where 
he were ; but when his pursuers came up, and made in- 
quiry for him, the wood- cutter was silent, but with his 
finger pointed to the place of his concealment. The 
addressers point to the way of opposition to the war, and 
furnish many arguments of which liberal use is made. 
I have seen only an extract of Dr. Parish's late fast ser- 
mon in a news])aper ; which 1 consider of no other im- 
portance than Dr. Franklin did light matters, such as 
"straws and feathers in the street, which serve only to 
show which way the wind blows." And the Doctor's 



1% 

against the war, appears to be a blind, furious and giddy 
tornado ; urging his people on to resistance, with as 
much confidence as if he had a right so to do, and the 
power of making war and peace were delegated solely to 
him. The Doctor expresses himself thus, "And still do 
you hope, and hope, and hope, for a change of measures 
In the French citizens, the Gallatins, the Jeffer- 
soNS, the Burrs and Madisons of the country ? You 
may as well expect that the freezing blasts of winter 
will cover your fields with corn, your gardens with 
blossoms." "Then do what is infinitely easy ; let 
there be no war in your territories: pro- 
claim AN honorable neutrality." The Doctor 
must be totally mistaken ; that which he calls '■'■iiijinitely 
easy^ ' is utterly impossible. The amputation of a member 
from the Union cannot be performed without great pain 
and blood ; and if the hemorrhage should once take 
place, it would probably not be in the power of surgeons, 
with all their tourniquets to stop it, until the great ques- 
tion between whig and tory, in this country, shall be 
decided. The Dr. further observes, "This nefarious 
declaration of war is nothing more nor less than a licence 
given by a Virginia vassal of the French emperor to the 
English nation, authorising them in legal form to destroy 
the property of,> New-England." "Then break 
away from this tremendous war, which is sinking 
' you and your posterity, and your country, into the abyss 
of ruin ! !" Thus Dr. Parish warmly exhorts his people 
to an "honorable neutrality," and to a "breaking away 
from this tremendous war." Dr. Osgood carries the 
subject further in its consequences, than the sagacity of 
Mr. Parish pointed out. Dr. Osgood pauses not at the 
idea of breaking away from war ; but predicts a civil 
war as being inevitable. In the 14th page of his pro- 
test he observes, "If at the present moment no symptoms 
of civil war appear, they certainly will soon, unless tjie 
courage of the war party fail them." The Doctor is so 
kind as to explain hoAv this most unhappy event is to 
receive its existence. He proceeds, "The opposition 
comprises all the best men in the nation, men of the great- 
est talents, courage and wealth, and whose Wasbingtonian 



73 

principles will compel them to die rather than to stain theii' 
hands in the blood of an unjust war. Prudence leads 
them, at present, to cloak their opposition under consti- 
tutional forms." Here the Doctor most egregiously mis- 
takes, if he thinks himself and other writers against the 
war are cloaked by the constitution, or have the least 
countenance from it. No principle in our constitutions 
of government can be more apparent than this, that a 
majority shall rule or decide all questions ; it is the very 
essence of republicanism. When a minority rule of 
decide questions for a majority, it is downright tyranny. 
We have been taught from our cradles this essential 
principle of our government, and it is universally prac- 
tised upon. In all our town meetings the majority carry . 
the vote — in all corporate societies of what name or 
nature soever — in all our general courts, if it be but a 
bare majority, the act is as valid as if it passed unani-; 
mously. So in the election of all officers under our state 
and federal constitutions, a majority determines without 
asking how great it is. One of our Presidents ol the 
United States was once chosen with but two majority ; 
and if Mr. Clinton had had in our late election for Pres- 
ident, but one majority, he would have been considered 
on all hands as being chosen. It would have been, 
wicked and ridiculous for the minority to stand it out 
M'hen the votes were legally given. So in Congress the 
majority must decide, and the Union abide the decision ; 
or reverse the system, and let the minority govern, \Ahich 
is totally inconsistent with a representative government. 
And the more important the question decided is to the 
nation, by so much the more important it is, that it be 
yielded to, without further opposition. And no question 
can be more important than that of v»^ar, -which requires 
tiie unanimity and energy of the nation, and none there- 
fore so loudly calling on the minority to yield to the im- 
portant decision, as in the present case of war. And 
now, when the question is determined after it had been for a 
long time in contemplation, and so openly and fairly dis- 
cussedin Congress, and every cii'cumstance undisguisedly 
laid before the people (except those confined to federal pa- 
pers) and a vast majority calling for it. as the last lesort 
10 



7^ 

for redress of past, and security against future injuries ; 
for the minority still to oppose, with all their exertions, 
in writing, uttering and publishing every thing true or 
false, as they please, to weaken the hands of our pfrople, 
and strengthen those of the enemy, is not only not 
"cloaking their opposition under constitutional forms," 
but it is contrary to, and subversive of the fundamental 
principle of our state and federal constitutions. For 
gentlemen to use the liberty of speech and of the press 
in this manner, and plead a constitutional right for it, is 
ridiculous as for the bloody assassin who shoots every 
neighbor who does not think as he does, and then plead 
a constitutional right to hold and bear arms, that they may 
not be taken from him. These gentlemen plead their 
consciences, their unbelief and their belief respecting the 
war ; but they must give liberty to the vast majority of 
their fellow citizens also, to possess consciences, unbelief 
and belief ; and let all remember, that according to their 
faith, it will be done unto them. If those gentlemen have 
faith, let them have it to' themselves as the Quakers do, 
and let them be as silent as they are, and not make such 
a noise about it. The Doctor proceeds, "Provoked at 
these obstacles, the patrons of war will have recourse to 
violence.'* Here the Doctor acknowledges their design 
to cast obstacles in the way of carrying on the war. In 
time of war is it an uncommon or unlawful thing to use 
violence to remove all obstacles to their success ? But, as 
it respects those gentlemen, I hope there will be no occa- 
sion to use violence — only let our wholesome laws be put 
into execution against treason and traitors, and such kind 
of obstacles will be removed. The Doctor proceeds in 
speaking of the opponents of the war, page 15, "Against 
these a popular clamour will be set up, a deadly hatred 
excited. They will be called enemies to their count-y, 
traitors, the friends of Britain and monarchy, opposers 
of a republican government, and insurgents against the 
law." To this it is sufficient only to say, that when 
any number of men have already commenced a practice 
of stealino;, robbing and killing, and are determined to 
pursue it, it requires no great sagacity in them to foresee 
that they will be called thieves, robbers and murderers. 



■ 75 

The Doctor proceeds, "At length they will be proclaimed 
rebels, -and force used to sulxlue them. And as no 
considerable number of men will tamely surrender their 
lives, force on the one side will produce force on the 
other. Thus a civil war becomes as certain as the events 
which happen according to the known laws and the estab- 
lished course of nature." The Doctor seems to^ have 
determined for himself, at all hazards, to persevere in this 
kind of opposition — page 18, "For myself, according 
to the course of natiu-e, 1 have but a short time ehher 
to mourn or rejoice in the affairs of men ; but while it 
shall please God to continue me in this tabernacle, by his 
grace, no fear of man shall deter me from discharging 
what, in my conscience, I believe to be my duty, in 
testifying against wickedness in high places, as well as 
in Icw^'* The Doctor expresses but one possible incident 
which may prevent all the horrors of a civil war, that is 
"unless the courage of the war party fail them.*' Mr. 
Channing speaks more cautiously upon the subject, page 
18th, "Resistance of established power is so great an 
evil — civil commotion excites such destructive passions, 
the result is so tremendously imcertain, — that every mil- 
der method of relief should first be tried, and fairly tried. 
The last dreadful resort is never justifiable, until the 
injured memb^Ts of the community arc brought to despair 
of other relief, and are so far united in views and purposes 
as to be authorized in the hope of success." Mr. Chan- 
ning proceeds with some pertinent observations in draw- 
ing a comparison between our revolt from England 
conducted by Washington, and a supposed one from 
our own government, and concludes with these w^ords : 
"From a revolution, conducted by such a man, under 
such circumstances, let no conclusion be hastily drawn 
on the subject of civil commotion." But Dr. Osgood 
considers that nothing can prevent this "unless the 
courage of the war party fail them." Of this however 
there is no probability. The United States are now 
engaged and determined to defend their rights of the 
ocean and of their seamen ; not to become tributary 
to England, nor to have "the impressment occasionaly 
of some of our sailors." Thev have manifested this in 



5'6 

the election of our worthy president, when the odds 
in the votes was ten thousand of dollars in favour of Mr. 
Clinton. But the happiness of our country was, that 
we had electors who would not sell it for corruptible 
things. Now if the opponents of the war comprise all 
theVisest and best men in the country, as Dr. Osgood 
says, will they be so infinitely rash and mad as to com- 
mence a civil war, by resisting the execution of the laws 
against traitors and culprits, and carry it on against their 
own neighbors and country, because their consciences 
will not suifer them to join with their country in carrying 
one on against an old, restless, and injurious enemy ? 
These gentlemen surely must possess consciences of 
strange operations ! It is utterly impossible that any wise 
.or good men should conduct thus. And with respect to 
the division of the people relative to the war, I believe 
gentlemen have given a very exaggerated account of it ; 
and especially Dr. Osgood, see page 15th — "In New- 
England, the war declared cannot be approved by any 
but here and there a furious party leader, a few ignorant, 
deluded fanatics, and a handful of desperadoes. It must 
be abhorred by more than nine- tenths of the people in 
the mercantile States, and by every sober and good man 
in all the States." This is thought to be quite an.exag- 
gerated account ; but whether the Doctor in it infringes 
the most upon truth or decency^ is not a question of 
importance ; but when it is considered that he has been 
favored with a liberal and christian education, is now 
advanced in years, and has alwa3^s been placed in a circle 
of refined friends and a polite neighborhood, we should 
naturally have supposed, that he would ha\'e paid m'cflPe 
respect to both ! What dependence can ever be put 
upon the declarations of gentlemen who write thus ex- 
travagandy ? "As a mad man who casteth firebrands, 
arrows anddeadi, so is the man that deceivethhis n^-gh- 
bor, and saith, Am not I in sport?" It is manifest that 
in federal writings there are great pains taker to deceive 
the people, and not only in implication and consequence, 
but by full, bold and false assertions, which have had their 
effect in dividing them liom their present government. 
This has been the open and bold work of federal 



77 

presses and federal preaching for years. And had you, 
reverend gv ntlenieii, put forth half of your zeal to enlight- 
en the people and communicate truth, where it has been 
exercr^ed to propagate error, we should be at this time 
a united people, and in the enjoyment of peace and com- 
merce at this moment. It has already been observed in 
this address, that England has extended her unjust pre- 
tensiohs towards us, as she could find herself supported 
by citizens in this country. According to our apparent 
li' i-r'on, her boldness would grow to make encroach- 
ments upon our essential rights. The poiicy of Eng- 
land has been to divide us by whatever means were in 
her power. And there have been high exertion and 
considerable expense to get the Clergy on her side, and 
she has thus far succeeded. With a prospect of success 
in making the United States tributary to her, England 
has with her usually deceptive measures brought the 
government of the United States to declare war, or 
yield up their essential rights, and become tributary to 
iier as colonies, dependent on her for protection. Those 
gentlemen, therefore, who have been opposed to the 
measures our government have taken to repel the unjust 
aggressions of England, may view themselves as bring- 
ing the present war upon our country. Had not Eng- 
land found means to obtain advocates among the citizens 
of the United States, she would not have pushed our 
government to the extremity of war ; but she has been 
so encouraged and supported by her ' 'friends'* in and 
out of Congress, as to do it. And now she expects that 
they will so exert themselves as to enervate and render 
ineffectual the measures our government have taken, 
and to alienate the people in the northern States from 
their general government, and thus "divide and con- 
quer ;" you may therefore, reverend gentlemen, justly at- 
tribute to that influence which you support, all the 
political evils which our country experiences. Had it 
not have been for this siding with England, to give her 
encouragement of bringing the United States subservient 
to herself, we might now have been at peace and in the 
enjoyment of all our neutral commercial rights. All 
the wickedness therefore, madness and atrocity which 



has been attributed to our govermacr.i, ma v rusJv be 
flung back upon the influence which you support. This 
has brought the calamity of war witi^ ull its ; ..• .dant 
evils upon us. Many of you, reverend gentlemen have 
delineated them as if you felt the weight of them. Re- 
view your own writings, look carefully at them Con- 
sider the loss of commerce, of property, of ordinary 
pursuits, of the depreciation of estates, and the poverty 
of multiplied families ; the influence which you support 
has done this. Review your observations upon the 
expenses of the war as they respect the public. "High 
taxes, nothing to pay, murmuring, discontent and insur- 
rections," and attach this to the influence which you 
support. Review your just observations upon the 
moral effect of the war ; its thousand temptations, in its 
consequences, to corrupt the integrity and morals of the 
people; and ascribe this to the cause which you abet. 
Look further, upon the absolute necessity imposed upon 
our government, for the defence of our essential rights, 
and not become tributary to the tyrant of the seas, and 
for the security of our seamen, to "send our sons and 
brothers in the field," to be "marks for the sharp shoot- 
ers,'* and their flesh to be given to carniverous animals, 
and their bones to bleach in the norllicrn regions upon 
the surface of the earth. Add to this the lamentations 
of dear friends and connexions for them, and say the 
influence which you support has done it. And if we 
should experience a civil war among ourselves, as Dr. 
Osgood sanguinely predicts, and, as your sermons, 
reverend gentlemen, are calculated to stir up, and see, 
not only neighbor against neighbor, wielding the dread- 
ful instruments of death ; but father against the son, 
and the son against the father ; and the mother against 
the daughter, and the daughter against the mother ; this 
awful and unnatural scene of horror and distress, should 
it take place, will be solely attributed to the influence 
which you now make and support. I entreat you, 
therefore, to consider, "Pause, pause, for Heaven's sake 
pause !*' Quit this destructive, this accursed influence. 
Retrace your steps. In pursuing them we may all 
adopt the language of Dr. Osgood, where he says, "My 



79 

"brethren, the blood runs cold in my veins, at the pros- 
pect of the heart chilling scenes before us.*' Tell your 
j)eople and the public that you have been deceived, as 
I believe some of you may justly do, being confined for 
your knowledge principally to federal publications. Tell 
them that you did put confidence in the integrity and 
veracity of the thirty-four members of Congress who 
became addressers to their constituents ; that their 
address is the bitter root, as the root of the verb from 
which is formed the numerous modifications of words ; 
that you have conjugated it, and declined it in all its 
modes and tv nses, and find that the principal things of 
complaint therein, are without foundation ; that the 
addressers never have been denied the utmost freedom 
of debate in Congress, either with open or closed doors. 
Teil them that on examining public documents, you find 
that the impressment of our seamen has ever been con- 
sidered a just ground for a declaration of war against 
England under every administration of our government. 
That was the uniform sentiment of Washington, of 
Adams and Jefferson, as well as that of Madison and the 
present Congress. Let your people know, that you nov/ 
see, that the imputation of insincerity in our government, 
in their negotiations with England on the subject, was ill 
founded ; that this is owned, provedj and expressly ac- 
knowledged by Lord Castlereagh to Mr. Russell. Let 
them understand also that there was no perfidy in our 
government relative to the Indians, in the Wabash 
expedition, although it existed "without any express act 
of Congress," — that there was no need of any, that 
there existed a standing law for the purpose, as you have 
seen, under which Washington acted in Harmar's expe- 
dition, and under which Madison acted in Harrison's 
expedition. And with respect to the people's "beino- 
carefully kept in ignorance of the progress of measures 
until the purposes of administration were consummated, 
and the fate of the country sealed," as well as every 
other material objection against our present administra- 
tion, let them know that they all turn out, as you have 
clearly seen, to be great nothings. 



80 

Ox\LY let us feed the people with truth, and there 
%vill be no difficulty in uniting them. Let your people 
know xvhat England requires of us in her orders in 
council, of which our government complain. Not a 
word of this is to be seen in any federal papers or writ- 
ings ; nothing of it in the address, only they are barely 
named, as "the orders in council as they now exist, and 
with their present effect and operation^* but not a single 
word of what this effect and operation is. Nor have I 
seen a single lisp of it, gentlemen, in any of your sermons, 
any more than if no such thing existed ! Only let your 
people know that England requires the benefit or re- 
venue of almost all ourcommferce to the continent as much 
as if it were her own, and we her subjects. She assumes 
our right of the seas, as if she had turnpiked the Atlantic, 
set up the gates and placed her collector in the toll-house. 
Ask your people whether any body has ever told them 
this, and whether they are willing to pay a double revenue 
to England, to that which they pay in their commerce 
to their own government, and this merely because Eng- 
land will shoot us if we don't ? Those who would un- 
derstandingly yield to the British orders- in council, and 
to her impressment of our seamen, would submit to 
recolonization, and again become British subjects. Let 
\o\vc people know also that there is no foundation yet 
discovered, for so many bold assertions that our govern- 
ment are under the influence of and governed by Bona- 
parte — that the cry of French influence is no more than 
an invention of the enemy, as a set off", a balance to meet 
the just charge of British influence among us. The 
man must be blind to our political situation who does 
not see this. Even the addressers were able to wave all 
arguments our government make use of against the 
practice of impressment, and volunteer themselves as 
attornies for England. There is a British spirit amon^^ 
us, in opposition to the prosperity of the United States — 
federalism is this spirit, and nothing but old tonjism, 
"the old serpent in a new skin.'' But what will be the^ 
consequence, reverend gentlemen, of your succeding 
in your opposition to this war ? Wje shall have an 
instance of the minority's boldly wresting the reins ot 



81 

government from the hand of a majority, to the destruc- 
tion of our repubhcan government ! And this is not all — 
if we now be unable to resist England in her impious 
pretensions towards us, we may next expect she will as- 
sume a right to tax our merchandize sailing from one 
port to another in the U. States, which she may do with 
the same propriety, that she may execute her present 
demands ; she will only need to purchase but a few 
more friends among us, if any, if we cannot now carry 
on the war, for this or any other of her demands she may 
be pleased to make. In this case we shall fall totally 
under the power of England ; then may we expect she 
will pay us well for our past disobedience and rebellion 
against her ! Reverend gentlemen, this is impossible, it 
is totally impossible that you should succeed, and the 
independence of our country remain. What possibly 
can be your design and intention ? When we see gentle- 
men so zealously engaged, it is natural for us to be lieve 
they have some, to them, important object in view. 
We know what your influence tends to ; but it is rash 
to impeach the motives of gentlemen. Is it possible 
you can have ift view the annihilation of our federal 
constitution ? It is said without hesitation that your con- 
duct tends to this. And there are some passages in 
some of your sermons which have a bearing towards 
displeasedness with our federal constitution and forms of 
government. One writes in this manner, "And here I 
think it my duty to remark, that it is an essential defect 
in our federal constitution, in my own opinion and that 
of »iany others, that it does not require that such men 
alone, as we have now described, should be permitted to 
administer it ; that it does not recognize the Christian 
religion, nor even the existence of God ; so that even an 
atheist may be constitutionally placed at the head of our 
nation. This is a national sin for which we are now 
justly suffering the displeasure of heaven, and which 
ought to be deeply lamented and speedily reformed by 
the whole of the nation." This reverend gentleman, 
thmking as he now does, with many others, that our 
federal constitution has such an essential defect in it, and 
that it "is a national sm, for which we are now suffering 
11 



82, 

the displeasure of heaven ;" surely he, with many others, 
must feel themselves under high moral obligations, to be 
in the exercise of all their abilities, to remove this 
evil defect in the constitution. Another reverend gentle- 
man writes to this effect, "Our constitution has that 
in it which will inevitably destroy it— it tolerates Christ- 
ianity only as an innocent thing, and does not imbosom 
it, as that government which has so successfully resisted 
the strides of the tyrant of Europe.'* Now if those 
gentlemen think as much alike as they write, it must be 
the destruction of our federal constitution in an important 
article which their moral sensibility leads them now to 
effect. We may justly suppose them to be exerting 
themselves according to the dictates of their own con- 
sciences, which must be to remove "this national sin 
for which we are now suffering the displeasure of heaven." 
But our federal constitution contains nothing, nor has 
any deficiency in it "which will inevitably destroy it," 
but by the co-operation of the will of men. If those 
gentlemen be doing nothing then, in their view for the 
destruction of the federal constitution, to remove "this 
national sin, for which we are justly suffering the dis- 
pleasure of heaven,'* they live in neglect of what they 
believe to be duty, to remove the "displeasure of heaven" 
from us ; but if they be doing any thing for this purpose, 
it must be considered as being done in their recent 
sermons and publications. This being granted, all 
mystery ceases ; as it is app^ent their writings have 
this tendency ; for then they will, with propriety, be 
considered as acting with moral agency, or as causes hy 
council, whose conduct is directed to obtain a desired 
end. But after all, if you, gentlemen, should succeed in 
the annihilation of our federal constitution, and obtain 
one imbosoming Christianity, containing a religious test, 
and uniting church and state, all difficulties will not then 
be passed. Ten to one, but that, even with this barrier, 
we shall have bad as well as good men to rule over us ; 
and perhaps murderers who may be disposed to destroy 
the peace and happiness of mankind ; for you abundantly 
affirm that those who engage in an unjust war, or abet 
or lend their assistance to carry it on, are i^iilty of blood ; 



83 

and in several instances, to confirm tins you qvote 
writers upon the laws of nations. Moreover you speUc 
of the great difference between the present war and the 
former one we had with England, that then our cause 
was just, then you could support it, that then our enemy 
made unjust pretensions towards us, and carried on an 
unjust war against us ; of course, although the British 
constitution imbosoms Christianity, contains a religious 
test, and unites church and state, and comprises every 
barrier to keep bad men out of office ; yet at that time 
their king and a majority of parliament were murderers, 
and guilty of all the blood that was shed in that long and 
tedious conflict. It is presumed therefore that they 
could not have got worse men in parliament if they had 
been chosen without the restraint of a religious test. 
But because a religious test is no bar in the way of bad 
men's being in office, is not all the difficulty. Let the 
people but once find that they are like to be gulled out 
of their constitution, and to have one exonerating them 
from the burden of choosing their teachers of religion 
and morality, they will be more implacable than a bear 
robbed of her whelps. But, reverend gentlemen, if the 
destruction of our constitution be your object generally, 
as your writings tend to this, and as it is fairly inferred 
from moral principles in two instances ; is the method 
which you take to accomplish it, fair and honorable '? 
Will the holiness of the end sanctify such corrupt and 
deceptive means to obtain it ? Will it pardon for all the 
anarchy and confusion, which in such a case must be 
experienced ? It seenls to be difficult to write down our 
federal constitution or the present administrators thereof. 
Our rulers have withstood the shock of the severest 
volley of invectives that ever proceeded from the dragon*s 
mouth, and their ranks stand yet unbroken. In one of 
Dr. Osgood's former sermons this idea is contained, viz. 
that now ministers have not that respect shown them 

rnor that confidence reposed in them which ministers 
formerly had in this country. To this may I not ask 
the question which David did to his brother Eliab, in 
another. Is there not a cause ? The occasion may be 
wondered at ; but admitting it, the effect is not surpris- 



8* 

ing/Dut such as might be thought naturally to follow. If 
oyt half of the harsh illiberal things flung out against our 
rulers which are contained in your former as well as 
latter publications, had been believed generally, our rulers 
would long before now have been neglected by the 
people. Indeed it is an hard case, to stem the torrent 
of truth and make falsehood be generally believed : so long 
as Congress publish at suitable times their diplomatic 
correspondences with foreign nations, and lay them before 
the people, together with all their own proceedings upon 
them, the people are able to satisfy themselves with 
respect to our foreign relations. And under those cir- 
cumstances, let there be ever so loud a cry set up, of 
Wolf, Wolf ! the people will not be frighted, as long 
as they see it to be an innocent animal. But for this 
circumstance of having our foreign relations and the 
pleasures of Congress so amply laid before the public, 
it is thought that our present rulers would have been 
written down or out of office before now. Can all his- 
tory afford a parallel, or any thing that may bear re- 
motest likeness to that which we have constantly 
experienced for t^velve years past ? A constant course 
of the most virulent publications against the rulers of 
our nation, constitutionally chosen by the people, for the 
purpose of removing them and introducing in their 
places men who may favor the unjust pretensions of 
an old, intriguing, inveterate enemy. With as much 
propriety might the people have placed royalists in their 
councils, a Ruggles, an Oliver, or a Murray or Gore, in 
the time of our former contest with England ; as for the 
people now to place the friends of England in office. 
Our political situation will form as wonderful a trait in 
the history of cur country for future genercitions, as that 
of the old witchcraft in Salem is to us ; and a view 
of your sermons, reverend gentlemen, will excite in thena 
an association of as wonderful ideas as a sight of Gal- 
lou's-Hill* does now in us. And perhaps the same 

* Gallows-Hill is an eminence near Salem, where iLe witches 
were executed. 



85 

remedy awaits the present fascination which did that, viz. 
to hang the accuser instead of the accused. 

Thus, reverend gendemen, in this peculiar crisis of 
our national affairs, I also have been disposed to "show 
mine opinion," and have been the more liberal in quot- 
ing public documents, being sensible that nothing will 
have due effect, but that which shall convince the un- 
derstanding, which is the design of this address, and 
which requires plainness of speech. And if it be thought 
in any instances I have overleaped the bounds of decency, 
or have infringed upon those of decorum, you will con- 
sider that I have been in a situation to look at and to answer 
things unfounded, illiberal, and peculiarly irritating. In 
contemplation of your candor, and that of the public, 
with a view of the license we have to "prove all things 
and hold fast that which is good," this is submitted 
to your perusal, not flattering myself that it is calculated 
to exite that attention which the importance of the sub- 
ject demands. 

I have the honor to be, 

Reverend and respected gentlemen, 

Your most obedient and humble servant, 
SOLOMON AIKEN. 

LracUtt, February 25th, 1813. 



'HU 



-^ ■• 



I* 



> 



LBJL'26 



